Canadian Attorneys In The News

[slackmaster]

A light, humourous article about how a Canadian attorney successfully fought a traffic ticket:

English-only traffic sign ruled illegal

Toronto — A justice of the peace has ruled that a "no left turn" sign in Toronto is unenforceable because it is not written in both English and French.

The ruling Monday by Justice Alice Napier could result in thousands of traffic tickets being dismissed.

Lawyer Jennifer Myers argued that a traffic sign near Bay and Dundas streets violated the Highway Traffic Act and the French Languages Service Act because it was not in both official languages.

Napier agreed at a night court hearing Monday, and threw out a ticket issued to Myers for making an illegal left turn.

Myers does not speak French....

:D

For full copyrighted article please see http://toronto.cbc.ca/regional/servlet/View?filename=to_ticket20041019

[HEyHEY]

1. If he tried that in Calgary - he'd be lynched

[napi21]

2. Oh gee! Now US attorneys are going to do this because all

signs aren't in Spanish & English!

[Wickerman]

3. Now which are the US' official languages?

Don't think this will be an issue stateside.

Lawyer Jennifer Myers argued that a traffic sign near Bay and Dundas streets violated the Highway Traffic Act and the French Languages Service Act because it was not in both official languages.

[slackmaster]

4. I'm waiting for a story about a legally blind motorist

Suing a state or the federal government because the road signs aren't in Braille.

[Wickerman]

5. Careful

someone is gonna jump in any minute and start talking blind hunting.

err, D'oh!

[napi21]

6. I hate to burst your bubble, but there is a blind man who has a

carry permit! I'm not going to say which state it is, because I don't want to jeopardise his anonymity, but he went to the court house with his son, filled out the application with his son's help (son read the words on the page, and he filled in the answers), walked over to the counter, and was issued his carry permit. This man is totally blind in one eye, and has vision of 28% in the other.

He did this because he feels saferhaving a weapon at home and in his office. He owns his own business so it's only him, and his clients (by appointment.).

[Wickerman]

7. Doesn't burst my bubble in the slightest

Though I guess I would make it a real point to never mistake his office for the can or anything. Shit.

[slackmaster]

8. If the 28% vision is tunnel vision he may see quite well in that eye

Although in a limited field.

[napi21]

9. Naw, he has a service dog, uses a white cane, and really can't

see very much at all. This is a good friend of mine, and when he visited us last spring, he told us about this escapade. We all asked him "How in the world did you pull that off?" He really believes he can instinctively shoot straight enough to harm or kill an assaulter.

[slackmaster]

10. Ah, he must use The Force

It runs strong in some families.

:argh:

[MrSandman]

17. Arrows and barred circles...

Written signs seem to be verboten stateside.

[petronius]

18. Maybe we can...

In California the Dymally-Alatorre Act says that

7292. Every state agency, as defined in Section 11000, except the
State Compensation Insurance Fund, directly involved in the
furnishing of information or the rendering of services to the public
whereby contact is made with a substantial number of
non-English-speaking people, shall employ a sufficient number of
qualified bilingual persons in public contact positions to ensure
provision of information and services to the public, in the language
of the non-English-speaking person.

Now all we need is for a non-English-reading driver to sue CalTrans and demand a translator in the passenger seat. :) Maybe they'd have a case, when you consider that the DMV will give driving exams in a bunch of languages...

[iverglas]

11. if only

... there were "attorneys" in Canada.

"Lawyer Jennifer Myers argued ... ."

Now, if she'd been in Quebec, she might have been an attorney. Or an advocate. Or whatever parody of English the Quebec legislature had come up with lately.

Now, I happen to know a whole lot about this subject (services to the public in both official languages, access to justice in both official languages ...), and I'm not getting this one.

From the article:

George Bartlett, director of prosecutions for the city of Toronto, said a provision of the Highway Traffic Act that requires French-language signs does not apply because City Council never approved it.

Highway Traffic Act? Nothing there. There are regulations under that Act, the Signs Regulations, that are relevant:

http://www.canlii.org/on/laws/regu/1990r.615/20040901/whole.html

e.g.:

(1.1) Despite subsection (1), where the council of a municipality that is in an area designated by the French Language Services Act designates a portion of a highway under subsection 128 (5) of the Act, ...

-- and of course the French Language Services Act itself:

http://www.canlii.org/on/laws/sta/f-32/20040901/whole.html

Municipal by-laws re official languages

14. (1) The council of a municipality that is in an area designated in the Schedule may pass a by-law providing that the administration of the municipality shall be conducted in both English and French and that all or specified municipal services to the public shall be made available in both languages.

Right to services in English and French

(2) When a by-law referred to in subsection (1) is in effect, a person has the right to communicate in English or French with any office of the municipality, and to receive available services to which the by-law applies, in either language.

I don't see what the basis for the decision is, myself. JPs are notorious idiots.

For the info of anyone interested:

http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Part I of the Constitution Act, 1982

16. (1) English and French are the official languages of Canada and have equality of status and equal rights and privileges as to their use in all institutions of the Parliament and government of Canada.

... Advancement of status and use

(3) Nothing in this Charter limits the authority of Parliament or a legislature to advance the equality of status or use of English and French.

... Proceedings of Parliament

17. (1) Everyone has the right to use English or French in any debates and other proceedings of Parliament.

... Parliamentary statutes and records

18. (1) The statutes, records and journals of Parliament shall be printed and published in English and French and both language versions are equally authoritative.

... Proceedings in courts established by Parliament

19. (1) Either English or French may be used by any person in, or in any pleading in or process issuing from, any court established by Parliament.

... Communications by public with federal institutions

20. (1) Any member of the public in Canada has the right to communicate with, and to receive available services from, any head or central office of an institution of the Parliament or government of Canada in English or French, and has the same right with respect to any other office of any such institution where
a) there is a significant demand for communications with and services from that office in such language; or
b) due to the nature of the office, it is reasonable that communications with and services from that office be available in both English and French.

... Continuation of existing constitutional provisions

21. Nothing in sections 16 to 20 abrogates or derogates from any right, privilege or obligation with respect to the English and French languages, or either of them, that exists or is continued by virtue of any other provision of the Constitution of Canada.

Rights and privileges preserved

22. Nothing in sections 16 to 20 abrogates or derogates from any legal or customary right or privilege acquired or enjoyed either before or after the coming into force of this Charter with respect to any language that is not English or French.

Y'know, it's in the constitution, so it must be inalienable, and must have come from natural law or something, eh?

So isn't it high time that citizens of the US had the same rights 'n freedoms we have up here, and demanded that they be able to communicate with their gummint in French??

[NorthernSpy]

14. groundless decision, surely!

Would a city street (as opposed to a highway) be maintained with federal funds? If not, wouldn't the language of street signs be a local or provincial issue?

Last I heard, of the provinces only New Brunswick mandates bilingual road signs.

And shouldn't an inability to understand the meaning of traffic signs (whatever the language) be grounds for pulling ones license? If she really didn't grasp the intended message (just pretend...), then surely this woman is an incompetent driver who has failed to learn enough basic information about the roadways to drive safely!

Mary

[skippythwndrdog]

12. Leave it to a lawyer.

I suppose it was impossible for her to simply admit that she'd erred and pay the fine.

Don't get me wrong, I like lawyers just fine - except for the niggling over what's legal as opposed to what's the right thing to do.

(I am now waiting for the mass verbage of our lawyer friend to the north that will likely be a vainattempt to show what an ass I am for feeling that way - or at least there will be a verbal pummeling.)

[iverglas]

13. sorry

"I am now waiting for the mass verbage of our lawyer friend to the north ..."

Not a lawyer, don't know what "verbage" is, can't oblige.

Should you have a scintilla of interest in the world outside yer narrow valley, do feel free to read what I'd already written.

[NorthernSpy]

15. I think that Skippy is combining 'verbiage' and 'garbage'

You know -- a neologism.


Mary

[iverglas]

16. anything's possible

"I think that Skippy is combining 'verbiage' and 'garbage'"

... but *I* think that skippythwndrdog simply can't spell.

My money's on your thinking the same thing. Sadly, we can't call on this one.

[skippythwndrdog]

19. Actually, I type for caca. n/t