What is the test for a reasonable excuse under s. 254 (5) of the Criminal Code?
Saskatchewan, Canada
The following excerpt is from R. v. Kemp, 2000 SKQB 284 (CanLII):
It is settled law that “reasonable excuse” as defined in s. 254 (5) of the Criminal Code refers to matters which stand outside of the requirements which must be met under s. 254 (3) of the Criminal Code. See: Taraschuk v. R. (1975), 1975 CanLII 37 (SCC), 25 C.C.C. (2d) 108 (S.C.C.). Thus, the trial judge utilizing the concept of culpability for impaired driving to conclude that the respondent had reasonable excuse to refuse to provide a breath sample in response to a proper demand is an error in law.
"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.
Other Questions
Is contempt of an order registered under s. 13 of the Criminal Code of Canada a criminal or civil matter? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
What is the principle of common law use in determining whether a person can be found guilty of a criminal offence under the Criminal Code? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
What is the test for establishing a reasonable excuse in a criminal case? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
What is the test for a search without a warrant under the Criminal Code of Canada? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
Can para. 392 of the Criminal Code per se create a cause of action capable of supporting its claim? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
What is the test for failing to provide a breath sample under section 224 of the Criminal Code? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
What is the test for establishing that “the something” put forward by the defence is a reasonable excuse? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
What is the test for dismissing an appeal under s. 613(1) (b)(iii) of the Criminal Code of Canada for the error of a judge at the Court of Appeal? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
What is the test for a plaintiff to prove reasonable excuse in a motor vehicle accident case? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
Is a plaintiff entitled to a jury's opinion upon any reasonable excuse given by a railway company to look out for the approach of a train? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
