Defending Drinking, Drugs and Driving Cases 2019

Alan Gold

What’s inside

Table of contents

Table of content not available at this time

Details and specs:

Turn to Defending Drinking, Drugs and Driving Cases 2019 as a guide on how to defend a client charged with a drinking and driving offence. This practical book by prominent criminal defence lawyer Alan D. Gold offers advice on the entire the process, including how to handle a phone call from the police station, factual issues to note, novel defences, the relevant law, and sentencing.

New in this edition
The 2019 edition has been updated to reflect all the legislative developments since the last edition, the most notable of which is the December 2018 repeal and replacement of the Criminal Code’s driving offences regime by An Act to amend the Criminal Code (offences relating to conveyances) and to make consequential amendments to other Acts, S.C. 2018, c. 21 (formerly, Bill C-46).  In addition to commentary updates to reflect the Code’s new Part VIII.1, Offences relating to Conveyances, the author also provides a convenient concordance relating the new and enhanced offences with their repealed predecessors.
All significant case law developments that had taken place since the last edition have been incorporated into commentary revisions, and include the following decisions:
  • R. v. Roberts (Ont. C.A.) –  While evidence lawfully obtained through roadside sobriety testing may be admissible to establish grounds for arrest or detention, the Court of Appeal for Ontario reasoned that such evidence would not be admissible as proof of the detainee’s alcohol consumption or impairment itself in the absence of a reasonable opportunity to consult counsel.
  • R. v. Cyr-Langlois (S.C.C.) – The Supreme Court of Canada held that the accused’s evidence, showing he had not been under observation for a minimum of twenty minutes before administration of the breathalyzer test, was not sufficient to deny the Crown the benefit of the presumptions set out in former s. 258(1)(c) of the Criminal Code.
  • R. v. Gubbins (S.C.C.) – The Supreme Court of Canada authoritatively settled the question of historical instrument records by holding maintenance records for the breathalyzer used in this case to be third party records, which, in turn, triggers the requirement for the accused to show their likely relevance in order to obtain disclosure of these records.


Practice Area:
Criminal Law and Procedure


Publication Date:

Hardcover Specifications

Service #:

Sub #:


Shelf Space:


Anticip Unkeep Cost:

eBook Specifications