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 law - Motor vehicle offences - Impaired driving and driving over the legal limit - Accused acquitted on both charges - Whether trial judge committed reviewable error.

Sekhon was charged with impaired driving and driving over the legal limit. At the outset of the trial, defence counsel advised the presiding judge that the defence of necessity would be raised and that the Crown’s case was admitted as to both counts. Sekhon testified that he attended a wedding that evening. He was assaulted by several men after he was observed dancing with a married woman. He also testified to having one drink at the party, together with one beer. A Crown witness, Constable Shouchuk, testified that he was sitting in a marked police vehicle while his partner, Constable Najneddine, was driving. The officers were responding to a complaint. Constable Shouchuk was working on a computer when Constable Najneddine remarked that a vehicle proceeding eastbound was in their westbound lane of travel. The officers activated the emergency overhead lights of their vehicle, whereupon the oncoming vehicle stopped. On approaching the vehicle, the driver, Sekhon, remarked that he was drunk. Constable Shouchuk noted that Sekhon had some facial injuries and appeared dishevelled. He was immediately arrested for impaired driving. Constable Shouchuk had no memory of Sekhon saying anything about being pursued by others in a vehicle.

The trial judge found that Sekhon was in imminent danger at the party and that escape was prudent and necessary. The judge also found that Sekhon had no legal alternative to driving intoxicated in order to escape his assailants. The appeal to the Court of Queen’s Bench was allowed, and verdicts of guilty were substituted for both charges. A subsequent appeal (to the court of appeal) was dismissed. The issue before this Court is whether the trial judge committed a reviewable error.