R. v. Grant (2009 SCC 32)

You cannot be convicted of driving while disqualified if key evidence was obtained in violation of your Charter rights.

Court Decision That Changed Charter Detention Law

Canadian Criminal Case Law Summary

As Driving while disqualified lawyers, we rely on R. v. Grant when police stops, roadside questioning, or detention issues arise in Ontario driving cases. This case reshaped how courts determine whether evidence should be excluded when Charter rights are breached.

The Supreme Court created a structured test for excluding evidence obtained after:

• Arbitrary detention
• Improper questioning
• Failure to advise of the right to counsel
• Unlawful investigative stops

This case matters because many driving while disqualified charges begin with a police stop. If that stop violates the Charter, the evidence may be excluded.

Relevant Case Law:
R. v. Grant — Supreme Court of Canada (2009 SCC 32)
[View the full decision on CanLII (Canadian Legal Information Institute)]

The Legal Issue Before the Court

The Supreme Court had to decide how courts should determine whether evidence obtained after a Charter breach should be excluded.

The key issue was:

• When is a person legally detained?
• What happens if detention is unlawful?
• Should the evidence still be admitted?

The Court created a new three-part framework to guide trial judges.

This framework now governs how Charter breaches are analyzed in criminal driving cases.

What the Court Confirmed

The Court confirmed that evidence obtained after a Charter breach must be assessed under a structured test.

Judges must consider:

• The seriousness of the Charter breach
• The impact on the accused’s rights
• Society’s interest in adjudicating the case on its merits

If admitting the evidence would bring the administration of justice into disrepute, it must be excluded.

In driving while disqualified cases, that can be decisive.

Why This Case Matters in Real Driving While Disqualified Charges

Most driving while disqualified charges begin with a vehicle stop.

Important questions include:

• Was the stop lawful?
• Was the driver arbitrarily detained?
• Were Charter rights explained properly?
• Was questioning conducted before advising of the right to counsel?

If police exceeded their lawful authority, evidence such as admissions or licence status confirmation may be challenged.

These are not technicalities. Charter breaches can result in exclusion of key evidence.

How This Case Shapes Defence Strategy

R. v. Grant is central to defence strategy when a police stop is involved.

A proper defence will examine:

• The reason for the initial stop
• Whether detention occurred
• Whether the right to counsel was triggered
• Whether statements were voluntary
• Whether evidence flowed from an unlawful detention

If Charter rights were breached, a Charter application may be brought.

Exclusion of evidence can significantly weaken the Crown’s case.

What This Case Means for You

If you are facing driving while disqualified charges in Ontario, the legality of the police stop may be critical. Not every stop is lawful, and not every detention complies with the Charter. If your rights were breached, key evidence may be excluded.

Call 647-930-0200 now to speak directly with a criminal defence lawyer and get immediate guidance about your situation.

Frequently Asked Questions

Q. What did R. v. Grant decide?

A. The Supreme Court created a new test for deciding when evidence obtained after a Charter breach should be excluded. The Court established a three-part framework that trial judges must follow. This applies in all criminal cases, including driving while disqualified charges.

Q. When is someone considered detained by police?

A. A person is detained when they are legally required to comply with police direction or when a reasonable person would feel they have no choice but to comply. This can occur during roadside stops. The timing of detention affects when Charter rights apply.

Q. Can a driving while disqualified charge be dismissed because of a Charter breach?

A. In some cases, yes. If evidence was obtained through an unlawful detention or questioning, a court may exclude that evidence. If key evidence is excluded, the Crown may not be able to proceed. Each case depends on the facts.

Q. Do police always have the right to stop a vehicle?

A. Police have broad powers to stop vehicles under highway traffic legislation. However, the scope of questioning and detention is limited. If officers exceed those limits, Charter issues may arise.

Q. Why should I get legal advice quickly after a stop?

A. Charter issues depend heavily on timing and detail. What was said, when it was said, and how the stop unfolded all matter. Early legal review ensures those details are preserved and properly analyzed.

Table of Contents

Speak With An Experienced Lawyer
Free, confidential and no obligation consultation

Charitsis Criminal Lawyer Reviews

Michael McNamara

★★★★★ I would have faced criminal charges after a vehicle incident and had no idea how serious it was. Nicholas immediately dealt with the police and carefully reviewed everything. The outcome was far better than I expected. Professional, strategic, and extremely knowledgeable.

Jerry Devellis

★★★★★ By far the best DUI lawyer in Toronto. Nicholas walked me through every step after my traffic stop and explained my rights clearly. His preparation and confidence in court made a huge difference.

Luther Bootz

★★★★★ Facing a criminal driving charge was overwhelming. The team carefully reviewed how the stop happened and what the police said. Their attention to detail and Charter knowledge stood out immediately.

Dan Benjie PASCUA

★★★★★ Other lawyers scared me about my DUI case. This team focused on the facts and carefully reviewed the police interaction. Their calm and strategic approach changed everything for me.

Antoneta Antony

★★★★★ My case involved a roadside stop and serious driving charges. The firm explained my rights clearly and handled everything professionally. I felt supported from start to finish.

Aadam Alli

★★★★★ Charitsis Law represented me in a driving-related case and was extremely thorough. He reviewed the details of the police interaction carefully. His preparation gave me confidence during a stressful time.

G R

★★★★★ If you’re dealing with a criminal driving matter, this is the team you want. They were responsive, professional, and clearly experienced in serious court cases.

Zoe Karokis

★★★★★ Outstanding criminal defence. Professional, knowledgeable, and fully committed to achieving the best possible result in driving-related charges.