Case information

None.

Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.

Criminal and Penal Law - Offences - Elements of Offence - Dangerous Operation of Motor Vehicle - Whether British Columbia Court of Appeal has created a presumption that any accident caused by the negligence of a driver will result in a conviction for dangerous driving unless the driver can provide an explanation for the manner in which the vehicle was operated - Application of R. v. Hundal, [1993] 1 S.C.R. 867 - Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, s. 249.

On July 23, 2003, the applicant caused a head-on collision killing three occupants in another car. His pick-up truck crossed into the on-coming lane of traffic when it should have curved into a turn in the highway. A collision analyst estimated that his truck travelled about one metre in the wrong lane before impact and the sequence of events occurred in 0.00268 of a second. The accident occurred on a sunny day. The highway was dry, bare and in good condition. Both cars were travelling at the speed limit. There was no evidence of drunk driving, vehicle failure, evasive measures by either driver, or speeding. Witnesses testified that the applicant was driving with care and control before the collision occurred. They stated the accident occurred “instantaneously” and in “a matter of seconds”. Immediately after the accident, the applicant was stunned. He alternately said that he was driving and went unconscious, he thought he had suffered heat stroke, and he thought he had fallen asleep. He did not appear to comprehend some questions and could not remember how the accident had occurred. The applicant was charged with three counts of dangerous driving causing death