International Law

R. v. Kanda

Mr. Kanda was driving his two sons to school. His youngest son, eight years old, was in the back seat. When they left the house Mr. Kanda made sure everyone was wearing their seat belt. Alas, he was not aware that his son in the back seat had unfastened his seat belt during the drive. And so he was charged with violating s. 106(6) of the Highway Traffic Act for driving while a passenger under 16 was not wearing a seat belt. The issue was whether s. 106(6) was an offence of strict liability, thus leaving open a defence of due diligence, or one of absolute liability.

Held, after a duly diligent bit of statutory interpretation by the Ontario Court of Appeal, that the offence is one of strict liability.

After all, who can control an eight-year-old in the back seat?

Full post as published by Criminal Review on January 15, 2008 (boomark / email).