The recent decision in R. v. Corporation Gardaworld Services Transport de Valeurs Canada (2024 BCSC 1754) represents a significant shift in the use of photographic evidence in traffic violation cases in British Columbia, particularly those involving speed cameras and red light cameras.
The ruling by the BC Supreme Court redirects the approach lower courts have recently taken, which has often been skeptical of relying solely on photographic evidence when key details, such as the jurisdiction of a license plate, are unclear.
Gardaworld, the registered owner of an armoured vehicle, was initially acquitted in the Provincial Court after being charged with disobeying a red light. The prosecution relied on photographic evidence captured by a traffic light safety device. However, the trial judge acquitted Gardaworld, reasoning that the words ‘British Columbia’ were not visible on the license plate in the photograph, casting doubt on whether the plate was from the province.
On appeal, the Crown argued that the lower court erred by focusing too narrowly on the photograph and ignoring other evidence, including the ownership certificate, which clearly showed that the vehicle was registered in BC.
Justice Ahmad of the BC Supreme Court agreed, ruling that the lower court had made an error in law by failing to consider the evidence in its entirety. Justice Ahmad emphasized that the ‘reasonable doubt’ standard had been incorrectly applied, stating that the trial judge had “imposed a burden on the Crown much closer to ‘absolute certainty’ rather than the ‘reasonable doubt’ standard.”
This decision is a landmark for traffic ticket cases flowing from camera enforcement because it establishes that courts must not assess the photographic evidence in isolation but rather consider it alongside other documents, such as ownership and enforcement certificates. By overturning the acquittal and entering a conviction, Justice Ahmad set a precedent for a more comprehensive evaluation of evidence in photo radar cases, redirecting the law on this issue.
While this ruling does not entirely close the door on raising reasonable doubt where the photographic evidence is unclear, it certainly makes it more difficult to successfully dispute these tickets.
In addressing the trial judge’s concerns, Justice Ahmad highlighted that “common sense” dictates it is highly improbable that a license plate with the same alphanumeric sequence as one issued in BC would also be assigned in another jurisdiction to a vehicle of the same description. The court found that “the speculation that the license may have been issued in another jurisdiction simply does not stand up to reason and common sense. It is mere conjecture.”
This case will likely influence future traffic enforcement cases and reinforces that the standard of proof must rely on reason and common sense, not an unattainable demand for absolute certainty. By confirming that photographic evidence, supported by other documentation, can meet the burden of proof, this decision strengthens the use of photo radar in BC traffic ticket law.
