Reference re BC Motor Vehicle Act

BC's absolute-liability driving-while-suspended offence was unconstitutional: depriving a person of liberty (imprisonment) without requiring fault offends fundamental justice. Established that s.7 PFJs are substantive — not limited to natural-justice procedural protections.

BC's Motor Vehicle Act made driving while suspended an absolute-liability offence carrying mandatory imprisonment. No mens rea defence. Even an accused unaware of the suspension would be convicted and jailed.

Does an absolute-liability offence with imprisonment violate s.7? Are the principles of fundamental justice substantive or only procedural?

Yes; substantive. Provision struck down.

A law that has the potential to deprive a person of liberty (e.g. through imprisonment) cannot be an absolute-liability offence. The principles of fundamental justice in s.7 are substantive — they include the principle that the morally innocent should not be punished. Confirmed by reference to Hansard and the broader purpose of the Charter.

Lamer J rejected the federal AG argument that PFJs were limited to natural-justice procedural rules. The principles of fundamental justice are found in the basic tenets of the Canadian legal system. Punishing the morally innocent — those without mens rea where imprisonment is at stake — violates a basic tenet.

Foundational s.7 case. Opened the door to substantive review under s.7 — paving the way for Morgentaler, Bedford, Carter. Mens-rea-or-due-diligence requirement entrenched for any imprisonable offence.

Reference re BC Motor Vehicle Act, [1985] 2 SCR 486, 1985 CanLII 81 (SCC).

Dickson CJ, Beetz J, Estey J, McIntyre J, Lamer J, Wilson J, Le Dain J