Horsefield v. Registrar of Motor Vehicles (Ont.), (1997) 30 O.T.C. 138 (GD)

• Judge: Stong, J.
• Court: Ontario Court of Justice General Division (Canada)
• Case Date: August 05, 1997
• Jurisdiction: Ontario
• Citations: (1997), 30 O.T.C. 138 (GD)

Horsefield v. Reg. of Motor Vehicles (1997), 30 O.T.C. 138 (GD)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [1997] O.T.C. TBEd. AU.017

Ronald Horsefield (applicant) v. The Registrar of Motor Vehicles (respondent)

(File No. 78721/97)

Indexed As: Horsefield v. Registrar of Motor Vehicles (Ont.)

Ontario Court of Justice

General Division

Stong, J.

August 5, 1997.

Summary:

On December 29, 1996, the Durham Regional Police were conducting a "seasonal spot check" of drivers in the City of Oshawa. At 12:18 a.m., Horsefield was stopped and was asked to provide a breath sample in a roadside screening device. A "fail" was registered. Horsefield was arrested for driving with more than 80 mg. of alcohol in 100 ml. of blood. The arresting officer then demanded, pursuant to s. 254(3) of the Criminal Code, that Horsefield provide a breath sample. Horsefield complied. The readings were .09. Horsefield was charged with driving with excessive blood-alcohol content. Also, the Registrar of Motor Vehicles immediately suspended Horsefield's driver's license for 90 days pursuant to the Administrative Drivers License Suspension program provided under ss. 48.3, 49 and 50.1 of the Highway Traffic Act (Ont.). Horsefield applied, pursuant to s. 6(2) of the Judicial Review Procedures Act (Ont.), for judicial review of the Registrar's decision. The application was accompanied by an application for an interlocutory and permanent injunction to suspend or terminate Horsefield's license suspension pending the determination of the criminal charge against him. Horsefield also sought an interim order staying his license suspension pending the determination of his judicial review application. The applications for an interlocutory injunction and for an interim order were dismissed.

The Ontario Court (General Division), in a judgment delivered after the expiry of the 90-day suspension of Horsefield's drivers' license, allowed the application for judicial review. The court declared that s. 48.3 of the Highway Traffic Act was unconstitutional because the Province of Ontario legislated inconsistently with an area already occupied by legislation adopted by the Parliament of Canada under its criminal law power hence paramountcy of Parliament's legislation. The court added that s. 48.3 violated s. 7 of the Charter and was not saved by s. 1.

Civil Rights - Topic 648

Liberty - Limitations on - Drivers' licences - See paragraphs 29 to 48.

Civil Rights - Topic 686

Liberty - Principles of fundamental justice - Deprivation of - What constitutes - See paragraphs 29, 30, 49 to 70.

Civil Rights - Topic 8344

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Application - Exceptions - Principles of fundamental justice (Charter, s. 7) - See paragraphs 29, 30, 49 to 70.

Civil Rights - Topic 8348

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Application - Exceptions - Reasonable limits prescribed by law (Charter, s. 1) - See paragraphs 71 to 77.

Constitutional Law - Topic 3614

Paramountcy of federal statutes - Overlapping legislation - Conflict - What constitutes - See paragraphs 17 to 28.

Constitutional Law - Topic 6500

Federal jurisdiction - Criminal law - Respecting particular matters - Impaired driving - See paragraphs 17 to 28.

Cases Noticed:

Prince Edward Island (Provincial Secretary) v. Egan, [1941] S.C.R. 396, consd. [para. 17].

R. v. Phillips (1988), 27 O.A.C. 380; 42 C.C.C.(3d) 150 (C.A.), consd. [para. 22].

Paganelli v. Registrar of Motor Vehicles (Ont.) (1987), 6 M.V.R.(2d) 252 (Ont. Div. Ct.), consd. [para. 31].

Aluminum Co. of Canada Ltd. v. Ontario (Minister of the Environment) (1986), 16 O.A.C. 14; 55 O.R.(2d) 522 (Div. Ct.), refd to. [para. 32].

R. v. Videoflicks Ltd. et al. (1984), 5 O.A.C. 1; 48 O.R.(2d) 395 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 32].

R. v. Quesnel (1985), 12 O.A.C. 165; 53 O.R.(2d) 388 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 33].

Charbonneau v. College of Physicians and Surgeons (Ont.) (1985), 52 O.R.(2d) 552 (H.C.), refd to. [para. 33].

Malartic Hygrade Gold Mines (Canada) Ltd. v. Ontario Securities Commission (1986), 15 O.A.C. 124; 54 O.R.(2d) 544 (Div. Ct.), refd to. [para. 33].

R. v. Miles of Music Ltd. and Roch (1989), 31 O.A.C. 380; 74 O.R.(2d) 518 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 34].

Biscotti, Costantine and Orton v. Ontario Securities Commission (1990), 40 O.A.C. 129; 74 O.R.(2d) 119 (Div. Ct.), refd to. [para. 34].

Peel (Regional Municipality) v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Co. of Canada Ltd. (1991), 44 O.A.C. 179; 2 O.R.(3d) 65 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 34].

Kopyto v. Law Society of Upper Canada (1993), 67 O.A.C. 297; 107 D.L.R.(4th) 259, refd to. [para. 34].

R. v. Dedman, [1985] 2 S.C.R. 2; 60 N.R. 34; 11 O.A.C. 241; 46 C.R.(3d) 193; 20 C.C.C.(3d) 97; 34 M.V.R. 1, consd. [para. 39].

R. v. Waterfield, [1964] 1 Q.B. 164 (Eng. C.A.), refd to. [para. 39].

R. v. Hufsky, [1988] 1 S.C.R. 621; 84 N.R. 365; 27 O.A.C. 103; 40 C.C.C.(3d) 398; 63 C.R.(3d) 14; 4 M.V.R.(2d) 170; 32 C.R.R. 193, refd to. [para. 39].

R. v. Rowland (1984), 56 A.R. 10; 13 C.C.C.(3d) 367 (Q.B.), consd. [para. 46].

R. v. Sharma, [1992] 1 S.C.R. 814; 134 N.R. 368; 53 O.A.C. 288; 71 C.C.C.(3d) 184; 12 C.R.(4th) 45, consd. [para. 47].

Reference Re Section 94(2) of the Motor Vehicle Act (B.C.), [1985] 2 S.C.R. 486; 63 N.R. 266; [1986] 1 W.W.R. 481; 23 C.C.C.(3d) 289; 48 C.R.(3d) 289; 24 D.L.R.(4th) 536; 36 M.V.R. 240; 69 B.C.L.R.(2d) 145; 18 C.R.R. 30, consd. [para. 49].

R. v. Potma (1983), 31 C.R.(3d) 231 (Ont. C.A.), consd. [para. 50].

Rodriguez v. British Columbia (Attorney General) et al., [1993] 3 S.C.R. 519; 158 N.R. 1; 34 B.C.A.C. 1; 56 W.A.C. 1; 24 C.R.(4th) 281, consd. [para. 51].

Singh v. Minister of Employment and Immigration, [1985] 1 S.C.R. 177; 58 N.R. 1; 17 D.L.R.(4th) 422, consd. [para. 52].

Selig v. Registrar of Motor Vehicles (N.S.) (1996), 155 N.S.R.(2d) 38; 457 A.P.R. 38 (C.A.), consd. [para. 57].

R. v. Seo (1986), 13 O.A.C. 359; 25 C.C.C.(3d) 385 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 59].

R. v. Grant, [1991] 3 S.C.R. 139; 130 N.R. 250; 93 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 181; 292 A.P.R. 181; 67 C.C.C.(3d) 268; 7 C.R.(4th) 388, refd to. [para. 62].

R. v. Campbell (1988), 29 O.A.C. 317; 44 C.C.C.(3d) 502 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 62].

R. v. MacGillivray (1971), 4 C.C.C.(2d) 244 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 62].

R. v. Martindale (1995), 45 C.R.(4th) 111 (B.C.S.C.), refd to. [para. 62].

R. v. Walton (J.W.) (1996), 186 A.R. 18 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 62].

R. v. Greenan (J.A.) (1995), 135 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 313; 420 A.P.R. 313; 18 M.V.R.(3d) 315 (P.E.I.T.D.), refd to. [para. 62].

R. v. Johnson (K.N.) (1996), 182 A.R. 140 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 62].

R. v. Moser (1992), 53 O.A.C. 145; 13 C.R.(4th) 96 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 62].

R. v. Holt (1995), 11 M.V.R.(3d) 75 (B.C.S.C.), refd to. [para. 62].

R. v. Phinney (1979), 33 N.S.R.(2d) 266; 57 A.P.R. 266; 49 C.C.C.(2d) 81 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 62].

R. v. Thomsen, [1988] 1 S.C.R. 640; 84 N.R. 347; 27 O.A.C. 85; 63 C.R.(3d) 1; 40 C.C.C.(3d) 411; 4 M.V.R.(2d) 185; 32 C.R.R. 257, consd. [para. 66].

Statutes Noticed:

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, 1982, sect. 1 [para. 71]; sect. 7 [para. 29].

Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, sect. 258 [para. 21].

Highway Traffic Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H-8, sect. 48.3 [para. 5]; sect. 50.1 [para. 55].

Counsel:

R.J. Blaise MacLean and Mary Ann Cocchetto, for the applicant;

Michel Hélie, for the respondent;

Alan D. Gold, for the intervener, Criminal Lawyers' Association.

This application was heard on February 12, 1997, by Stong, J., of the Ontario Court (General Division).

Stong, J., released the following decision on August 5, 1997.