Dangerous Driving

The Supreme Court of Canada on February 22, 2008 handed down a decision in which it determined that drivers who fall asleep behind the wheel or commit “momentary acts of negligence” should not be held criminally responsible for their mistakes even if there are devastating consequences.

 In a unanimous ruling nine justices of the court restored the acquittal of a British Columbia man charged with dangerous driving causing death following a fatal highway accident on the Trans-Canada Highway near Chase in 2003.

 The accused, Justin Beatty was driving his pickup truck on the Trans-Canada Highway on a clear summer day when it suddenly crossed the centerline of the road and collided with an oncoming car.  The three occupants of the other vehicle were killed as a result of the collision.  Mr. Beatty told witnesses at the scene that he had either fallen asleep behind the wheel or lost consciousness due to heat stroke after having worked all day in the sun.  There was no evidence of any intoxication on behalf of Mr. Beatty and witnesses who had observed his driving prior to the accident had said his truck had been driven normally and at the legal speed. 

The British Columbia Supreme Court at the accused’s trial acquitted him on the basis that his few seconds of negligent driving, while clearly making him liable for civil damages, could not, without more, raise his driving to that of a criminal act.  The BC Court of Appeal, however, after the crown had appealed the trial judge’s finding disagreed and ordered a new trial.  The Court of Appeal stated that they were bound to follow an earlier decision of the Supreme Court of Canada which held that any driving that gives rise to a marked departure from the norm is sufficient to establish criminal liability.  The crossing of the centerline by Mr. Beatty was a marked departure from the norm and as a consequence the Court of Appeal was of the view that the Supreme Court judge had misapplied the law.

 Mr. Beatty appealed the Court of Appeal decision to the Supreme Court which allowed his appeal and restored his acquittal.  In giving its decision the court recognized that he made a split-second mistake and that this unfortunately is all too common on Canada’s roads.  Justice Louise Charron in her judgment stated:  “Even the most able and prudent driver will from time to time suffer from momentary lapses of attention.  Such automatic and reflexive conduct may even pose a danger to other users of the highway.  If every departure from the civil norm is to be criminalized, regardless of the degree, we risk casting the net too widely and branding as criminals persons who are in reality not morally blameworthy.  Such an approach risks violating the principle of fundamental justice that the morally innocent not be deprived of liberty.”

 The Court determined that in order for an accused to be found guilty of the offence of dangerous driving it is necessary for the Crown to lead evidence of a deliberate intention to create a danger suggestive of a marked departure from the norm. As there was no evidence of improper driving before Mr. Beatty’s vehicle was involved in the collision and as it appeared the collision was a result of a momentary lapse of  attention it was insufficient to support a finding of a marked departure from the standard of care of a prudent driver.
 As a result of the Supreme Court’s decision the risk to drivers being presumed criminally responsible for brief negligent acts in driving has been significantly reduced.
 
The full court’s decision is found at
http://scc.lexum.umontreal.ca/en/2008/2008scc5/2008scc5.html

For more information on Criminal Law, contact Pushor Mitchell partner Clarke Burnett at:
burnett@pushormitchell.com or (250)869-1205