R. v. Shannahan, (1977) 16 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 165 (NFPC)

• Court: Newfoundland and Labrador Provincial Court (Canada)
• Case Date: April 15, 1977
• Jurisdiction: Newfoundland and Labrador
• Citations: (1977), 16 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 165 (NFPC)

R. v. Shannahan (1977), 16 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 165 (NFPC);

    42 A.P.R. 165

MLB headnote and full text

R. v. Shannahan

Indexed As: R. v. Shannahan

Newfoundland Provincial Court

District of St. John's

Luther, Mag.

April 15, 1977.

Summary:

This case arose out of a charge against the accused of driving with an excessive blood-alcohol content, contrary to s. 236(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada. At the trial of the accused the certificate of the results of the analysis of the accused's breath was ruled inadmissible. The breathalyzer technician testified, but did not say that the breathalyzer machine used was "an approved instrument".

The Newfoundland Provincial Court acquitted the accused on the ground that the Crown failed to prove that the breathalyzer machine was "an approved instrument" within the meaning of s. 237(1)(c)(iii) of the Criminal Code.

Criminal Law - Topic 1376

Motor vehicle - Impaired driving - Breathalyzer - Proof of blood-alcohol content - Criminal Code of Canada, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-34, s. 237(1) - The Newfoundland Provincial Court held that, where oral evidence of the results of a breathalyzer test is offered, only the requirements of s. 237(1)(c) must be met and not the requirements of s. 237(1)(f), which is applicable where a certificate is to be used - The Provincial Court held that, where oral evidence of the results of a breathalyzer test is offered, it must be proved that the breathalyzer machine is "an approved instrument", but that the model number of the machine need not be proved.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Walters (1975), 11 N.S.R.(2d) 443; 5 A.P.R. 443; 26 C.C.C.(2d) 56 (N.S.C.A.), folld. [para. 5].

R. v. Legge (1974), 8 N.S.R.(2d) 684 (N.S.C.A.); 17 C.C.C.(2d) 539, consd. [para. 8].

R. v. Jensen, [1975] W.W.D. 161 (B.C.), folld. [para. 10].

R. v. Gregorwich, [1975] W.W.D. 170, folld. [para. 10].

R. v. Gilbert, 31 C.C.C.(2d) 251, folld. [para. 10].

R. v. Pedrotti, 25 C.C.C.(2d) 154 (B.C.P.C.), not folld. [para. 11].

R. v. Stawnicky, [1975] 5 W.W.R. 131 (Alta. D.C.), not folld. [para. 11].

R. v. Bartaby, unreported, but referred to 32 C.R.N.S. 295, not folld. [para. 11].

R. v. Jones (1976), 16 N.B.R.(2d) 32; 21 A.P.R. 32, refd to. [para. 17].

Statutes Noticed:

Criminal Code of Canada, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-34, sect. 237(1)(c) [para. 5].

Counsel:

Robert B. Hyslop, for the Crown;

David B. Sparkes, for the accused.

This case was heard on April 15, 1977, at St. John's, Newfoundland, before LUTHER, Mag., of the Newfoundland Provincial Court, District of St. John's.

On April 15, 1977, LUTHER, Mag., orally delivered the following judgment: