R. v. Lutz (B.D.), (1992) 115 N.S.R.(2d) 300 (ProvCt)

• Judge: Crowell, P.C.J.
• Court: Provincial Court of Nova Scotia (Canada)
• Case Date: April 28, 1992
• Jurisdiction: Nova Scotia
• Citations: (1992), 115 N.S.R.(2d) 300 (ProvCt)

R. v. Lutz (B.D.) (1992), 115 N.S.R.(2d) 300 (ProvCt);

  314 A.P.R. 300

MLB headnote and full text

Her Majesty The Queen v. Bernard Douglas Lutz

(No. 245759)

Indexed As: R. v. Lutz (B.D.)

Nova Scotia Provincial Court

Crowell, P.C.J.

April 28, 1992.

Summary:

Lutz was charged with failing to obey traffic signs after police radar registered him travelling 73 kilometres per hour in a 50 kilometre per hour zone. Lutz argued that the radar instrument was a "radio" operated in contravention of s. 4 of the Radiocom­munication Act and therefore the speed reading was obtained in a manner which infringed his rights under ss. 7, 8 and 11 of the Charter and should be excluded.

The Nova Scotia Provincial Court con­victed Lutz.

Motor Vehicles - Topic 2686

Regulation of vehicles and traffic - Rate of speed - Evidence and proof - By radar equipment - Lutz was charged with failing to obey traffic signs after police radar registered him travelling 73 kilo­metres per hour in a 50 kilometre per hour zone - Lutz argued that the radar instrument was a "radio" under the Radiocommunication Act, that it was operated in contravention of s. 4 of that Act and that therefore the speed read­ing was obtained in a manner which infringed his rights under ss. 7, 8 and 11 of the Charter and should be excluded - The Nova Scotia Provincial Court con­victed Lutz - The court held that radar was not a radio and that Lutz's Charter rights were not infringed or denied by the use of the instrument.

Motor Vehicles - Topic 3101

Regulation of vehicles and traffic - Ob­servance of signs and traffic control sig­nals - General - [See Motor Vehicles - Topic 2686 ].

Telecommunications - Topic 1420

Radio - What constitutes a radio - [See Motor Vehicles - Topic 2686 ].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Drew (1991), 104 N.S.R.(2d) 115; 283 A.P.R. 115 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 25].

R. v. Mills, [1986] 1 S.C.R. 863; 67 N.R. 241; 16 O.A.C. 81; 52 C.R.(3d) 1; 26 C.C.C.(3d) 481; 29 D.L.R.(4th) 161, refd to. [para. 25].

R. v. Loveman (1992), 52 O.A.C. 94; 71 C.C.C.(3d) 123 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 26].

Statutes Noticed:

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, 1982, sect. 7, sect. 8, sect. 11 [para. 18].

Motor Vehicle Act, R.S.N.S. 1989, c. 293, sect. 83(2) [para. 1]; sect. 88(2) [para. 6].

Radiocommunication Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. R-2, sect. 4 [para. 6].

Counsel:

Darrell Carmichael, for the Crown;

Curtis Palmer, for the defence.

This case was heard at Kentville, N.S., before Crowell, P.C.J., of the Nova Scotia Provincial Court, who delivered the follow­ing judgment on April 28, 1992.