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 - Appeal - Application of curative proviso in Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, s. 686(b)(iii) - Whether Court of Appeal applied the curative powers provided by s.686(1)(b)(iii) according to a lower and different standard than that recognized by this Honourable Court – Whether Court of Appeal decision conflicts with R. v. Lozinski, 2009 BCCA 544, which makes clear that, when a trial judge has erred in law in relation to the mens rea for dangerous driving causing death, the reviewing court must not draw its own inferences in order to cure the lower court error - Whether the Court of Appeal decision adhered to the general guidelines set out in R. v. Beatty, [2008] 1 S.C.R. 49, for dangerous driving causing death.

In foggy conditions, and coming off a snow-covered side road with an uphill grade, Mr. Roy stopped at a stop sign, and then drove onto a highway and into the path of an oncoming tractor-trailer. His passenger was killed, and Mr. Roy was left with no recollection of the accident. He was therefore unable to provide evidence as to why he was driving or why he had left the stop sign without first ascertaining that it was safe to do so. He was familiar with the road and was well aware that the highway was a heavily-travelled truck route. The driver of the tractor-trailer testified that he had slowed due to the fog, and slowed further when he saw lights which he thought belonged to a vehicle stopped on the shoulder of the highway. When he realized that the vehicle was crossing the highway in front of him, he braked and his tractor-trailer swerved. He was unable to avoid the collision: the front of the tractor-trailer struck the left front side of the vehicle.

The trial judge convicted Mr. Roy of dangerous driving causing death based, in part, on R. v. Beatty, 2006 BCCA 229, 225 B.C.A.C. 154. Following the release of the reasons for judgment by the trial judge, Beatty was reversed by the Supreme Court of Canada and the mens rea element of dangerous driving was clarified. The Court of Appeal applied the curative proviso found in s. 686(1)(b)(iii) of the Criminal Code and dismissed the appeal. While the trial judge had analyzed the relevant facts in considering the actus reus, his factual findings were properly made and could be applied to the mens rea analysis. They allowed the Court of Appeal to conclude that Mr. Roy had possessed the requisite mental element for conviction of dangerous driving.