Mr. Frederickson was issued a 24-hour roadside suspension for failure to provide a breath sample to an RCMP officer. He was subsequently charged with impaired driving and refusal to comply with a breath demand. On an application for review of the driving prohibition, an adjudicator confirmed the 90-day prohibition and Mr. Frederickson did not seek judicial review of the adjudicator’s decision. Mr. Frederickson sought a stay of proceedings on the refusal to provide a breath sample, based on the defence of res judicata. A Provincial Court judge granted a stay of proceedings. On appeal of that decision, it was held that the rule in Kienapple does not apply to the circumstances of this case. Accordingly, the stay of proceedings was set aside and the matter was remitted for trial.

25. February 2003 0
Administrative law – Motor vehicles – Refusal of breathalyser test – Suspension of driver’s licence – Stay of proceedings – Res judicata – Kienapple rule R. v. Frederickson, [2002] B.C.J. No. 2895, British Columbia Supreme Court, December 23, 2002, Ross J. This was an appeal from a decision of a Provincial Court judge to enter ...