A summary of the Criminal Code provision for Dangerous Operation of a Conveyance.

Dangerous Operation of a Conveyance

Criminal Code Provision: Section 320.13(1)

320.13 (1) Everyone commits an offence who operates a conveyance in a manner that, having regard to all of the circumstances, is dangerous to the public.

Understanding Dangerous Operation

This offence pertains to the manner in which the vehicle is operated, rather than concerning alcohol or drug impairment. The crucial evaluation is whether the driving posed an objective danger to the public, implying that a sensible individual would acknowledge it as hazardous.

Examples Include:

• Driving at high speeds or competing on public streets.
• Disregarding red lights or stop signs carelessly.
• Rash or unpredictable lane shifts.
• Operating a vehicle while not fully attentive (e.g., sending messages).
• Recklessly maneuvering a boat or ATV in busy locations.

What the Crown Must Prove

• The defendant was driving a motor vehicle (or another mode of transport).
• The way of operating was hazardous considering all the conditions (road, traffic, weather, etc.).
• The defendant’s behaviour was significantly different from what a sensible driver would typically do.

Possible Defences

• Marked Departure Standard – the driving must be more than careless- it must clearly endanger the public.
• Medical Emergency – If the accused suffered a sudden medical event (i.e. seizure).

Sentencing for Dangerous Operation

This is a hybrid offence.

1. No injury sustained and prosecuted summarily, the maximum faced is 2 years less a day. By way of indictment could lead to a maximum imprisonment term of 10 years.
2. Causing Bodily Harm, the maximum sentence to be ordered is 14 years.
3. Causing death could lead to maximum life imprisonment.
4. Other consequences : driving prohibition, criminal record and insurance and civil liability.

Leading Case of Dangerous Operation

In the case of R.v. Beatty, 2008 SCC 5, the accused swerved into opposing lanes, resulting in the deaths of three individuals. The Supreme Court determined that a dangerous operation necessitates a “significant deviation” from the standard of care, rather than mere transient negligence. The driving must be significantly more dangerous than ordinary mistakes to qualify as a criminal offence.