Finally, I do not interpret Rhys v. Superintendent of Motor Vehicles et al. to stand for the proposition that there is a distinction between “impaired” and “affected” in the manner suggested by the trial judge. Rather, it would appear that in that case, the court was merely referring to the exact wording of the different offences set out in s. 254 of the Criminal Code, and s. 215 of the Motor Vehicle Act, respectively.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.