November 2018

Receiving a Notice of Intent to Prohibit can be a stressful experience. But these letters often take people by surprise. Often, that should not be the case. However, it appears that the Notice of Intent to Prohibit system at ICBC is fundamentally flawed, and therefore incapable of being administered in the proper way.

There is some serious oversight in this program that is missing, and some significant concerns about the manner in which these reviews take place that need to be addressed by ICBC and the Superintendent of Motor Vehicles.

This week on Weird and Wacky Wednesdays, we finally have a reason to think about why Canada’s bestiality laws may be a problem that solves itself. Then, we look into the port-a-potty pilfering that saw over 100 public toilets disappeared. And finally, we get to revisit cannibalism. Because that’s always fun.

So grab your barf-bags, and click on to read this week’s roundup of three weird and wacky legal cases from around the world.

Since there have been several cases now of people ticketed for having cannabis in a vehicle, and since I have now received several inquiries from clients charged with these provincial offences, I thought it would be prudent to write a short blog post outlining your right to transport cannabis in your vehicle.

Much ado has been made lately of a handful of cannabis-impaired driving cases in the media. The majority of these cases do not even have blood or urine test results to confirm the officer’s opinion that the drivers were impaired by cannabis. Some cases involve only violation tickets for having cannabis in a vehicle, or 24 hour prohibitions for drugs.

Despite the fanfare and attention, the reality is this: the battle for sensible cannabis-impaired driving laws will not be won in a dispute of a 24 Hour Prohibition for drugs.

And the police know that, which is why many police forces are electing to use these provisions to address these concerns.

And here’s why.