Vancouver – The BC Court of Appeal will hear arguments on March 18-20, 2013 in Chisholm, et al. v. British Columbia (Superintendent of Motor Vehicles). The Court will consider whether changes to B.C.’s drinking and driving law are constitutional.

In 2010, the government changed B.C.’s drinking and driving law. Under the new law, a driver who blows a “warn” or a “fail” on the roadside screening device will face automatic penalties. Penalties will also apply if a driver does not give a breath sample. The penalties include a driving ban, having the car seized, paying fines and fees to have the driver’s license returned, to tow the car and for storage.

Drivers who had either blown a “fail” or who had not given a breath sample challenged the law in 2011. The BC Supreme Court found that the law was unconstitutional only as it applied to drivers who blew a “fail.” The Court said that the law violated the Charter of Rights and Freedoms because there was no way for drivers to properly challenge the roadside breath test.

In May 2012, the government changed the law again. Now, police must tell drivers that they can ask for a second test on a different machine. The police must also tell drivers that they can ask for a review of the test through the Office of the Superintendent of Motor Vehicles.

The BCCLA is an intervener in this case. The BCCLA will argue that the drinking and driving law has a penal impact on drivers. Therefore, it violates the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty.

The BCCLA is represented by Claire Hunter and Eileen Patel of Hunter Litigation Chambers.

The BCCLA’s argument in the case is available here >>

What: BC Court of Appeal will hear oral arguments in Chisholm, et al. v. British Columbia (Superintendent of Motor Vehicles)

When: Oral arguments begin on Monday, March 18 at 10:00 am PST

Where: BC Court of Appeal (Vancouver, BC)

Who:  BCCLA representative available for comment