Mr. Helgesen was served with a 90-day administrative driving prohibition after refusing to provide a breath sample. Mr. Helgesen appealed to an adjudicator arguing that he had a reasonable excuse. The adjudicator disagreed and Mr. Helgesen petitioned for judicial review. The court concluded that the adjudicators decision was not patently unreasonable and the judicial review was dismissed.

22. October 2002 0
Administrative law – Motor vehicles – Refusal of breathalyser test – Suspension of driver’s licence – Adjudication – Judicial review application – Standard of review – Not patently unreasonable Helgesen v. British Columbia (Superintendent of Motor Vehicles), [2002] B.C.J. No. 2238, British Columbia Supreme Court, October 3, 2002, Macaulay J. Mr. Helgesen was driving a motor ...

Higgins failed in her application to overturn the decision of the Superintendent of Motor Vehicles upholding a notice of driving prohibition. The court held that the notice of driving prohibition was not a nullity merely because the issuing police officer had checked both the box with respect to the offence of having a blood alcohol concentration over the limit and the box for the offence of failing to provide a breath sample. The court referred the matter back to the Superintendent of Motor Vehicles with a direction that both offences could be considered.

23. April 2002 0
Administrative law – Motor vehicles – Suspension of driver’s licence – Judicial review application – Procedural requirements Higgins v. British Columbia (Attorney General), [2002] B.C.J. No. 545, British Columbia Supreme Court, March 14, 2002, E.R.A. Edwards J. Higgins was served with a Notice of Driving Prohibition by a police officer on April 7, 2001 and completed ...