Can a Crown Prosecution Service stop a driver for driving without a license?

Saskatchewan, Canada


The following excerpt is from R. v. Iron, 1987 CanLII 2866 (SK CA):

No evidence was led by the Crown in respect of these matters. Even if we assume that the purposive test had been met because the importance of regulating traffic on the highways warrants the limitation of a constitutionally protected right or freedom (and this, in the absence of any evidence, is doubtful), the proportionality test has not been met. Some remarks of White J., in Delaware v. Prouse at pp. 659-60, are appropriate: The foremost method of enforcing traffic and vehicle safety regulations, it must be recalled, is acting upon observed violations. Vehicle stops for traffic violations occur countless times each day; and on these occasions, licenses and registration papers are subject to inspection and drivers without them will be ascertained. Furthermore, drivers without licenses are presumably the less safe drivers whose propensities may well exhibit themselves. Absent some empirical data to the contrary, it must be assumed that finding an unlicensed driver among those who commit traffic violations is a much more likely event than finding an unlicensed driver by choosing randomly from the entire universe of drivers. If this were not so, licensing of drivers would hardly be an effective means of promoting roadway safety. It seems common sense that the percentage of all drivers on the road who are driving without a license is very small and that the number of licensed drivers who will be stopped in order to find one unlicensed operator will be large indeed. The contribution to highway safety made by discretionary stops selected from among drivers generally will therefore be marginal at best. Furthermore, and again absent something more than mere assertion to the contrary, we find it difficult to believe that the unlicensed driver would not be deterred by the possibility of being involved in a traffic violation or having some other experience calling for proof of his entitlement to drive but that he would be deterred by the possibility that he would be one of those chosen for a spot check. In terms of actually discovering unlicensed drivers or deterring them from driving, the spot check does not appear sufficiently productive to qualify as a reasonable law enforcement practice under the Fourth Amendment.

Other Questions


Can a driver who has been convicted of impaired driving for the past year continue to drive? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
Is objection No. 7 of the Applicant’s Notice of Motion a good service of service? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
How have the courts interpreted “without prejudice” without prejudice communications? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
In what circumstances will a driver of a high gear truck see another driver? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
In what circumstances have the courts found that the driver of a car to the right was driving recklessly at the right side of the road at the time of an oncoming collision? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
What is the test for a driver to be convicted of dangerous driving? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
In what circumstances can a director of public Prosecutions be prosecuted for gross misconduct? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
Does the rule against multiple convictions apply to a case involving the offences of driving with a blood alcohol content in excess of .08 coupled with the charge of driving while disqualified? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
What is the test for a license to license a surveyor to obtain materials from a park? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
What is the difference between a license fee imposed under a municipal by-law and a provincial licensing act? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.