Traffic under the HTA

Today’s decision from the Court of Appeal in R. v. Hemrayeva, 2010 ONCA 194, upholding a decision of a Justice of the Peace on a disobeying an officer directing traffic contrary to s. 134(1) of the Highway Traffic Act charge, deals with leave to the Court of Appeal and various other matters.  In so doing the decision defines “traffic” as including a single vehicle under the HTA:

 

[12]         I see no merit in the applicant’s submission that upon a review of the Highway Traffic Act, it is clear that the word “traffic” is intended to refer to more than one vehicle. The applicant did not provide examples of other sections in the Act that support this contention. On a cursory review of the Act, many sections, including s. 134(1) make it clear that the word “traffic” is intended to refer to one or more vehicles. To hold otherwise would lead to the absurd result that, for example, in an emergency involving a bridge collapse on the roadway ahead, a police officer could not exercise the discretion conferred by s. 134(1) to direct a single vehicle to stop where there was no other traffic in the area. As further examples, see ss. 134.1, 136(1)(b) and 138(1) of the Highway Traffic Act.