R v Baren

R. v. Baren

[1996] O.J. No. 5353
Ontario Court of Justice (Provincial Division) — Rosemay Prov. J. | February 9, 1996

Background

Lianne Baren was caught speeding at 75 km/h in a 40 km/h zone — a whopping 35 km/h over the limit. She didn't show up to her original trial date but was represented by an agent, and got convicted. Baren appealed and appeared in person before Judge Rosemay to tell her side of the story.

Her explanation was compelling: she felt a migraine headache coming on and knew from experience that she had about five minutes to get medication before she'd lose her vision and become unable to drive safely. Her boyfriend lived nearby and had her medication (Imitrex tablets), so she sped to get there before the migraine fully hit. A doctor's letter confirmed she was under medical care for migraines and used Imitrex as needed.

Issues

1. Can the defence of necessity apply to Highway Traffic Act speeding charges, which are absolute liability offences?
2. Did Baren's circumstances meet the legal test for necessity?

The Defence of Necessity

The Crown argued that speeding under the Highway Traffic Act is an absolute liability offence, meaning no defences should be available — you either did it or you didn't. They cited case law suggesting necessity doesn't apply to these types of charges. But Judge Rosemay disagreed.

The court found that Baren's situation created a genuine emergency. She faced "dire consequences" if she continued driving without getting her medication — specifically, she would lose her vision and become a danger to herself and others. The judge was satisfied that the defence of necessity did apply, even to an absolute liability speeding offence, because Baren was trying to prevent a greater harm (a serious accident caused by impaired vision).

The medical evidence was crucial. The doctor's letter, written just two days after the incident, confirmed Baren's ongoing migraine condition and her prescribed medication, lending credibility to her explanation.

Key Takeaway

Even absolute liability traffic offences can sometimes be defeated by the defence of necessity in truly emergency situations.

If you're facing a traffic charge and believe you had no choice but to break the law to prevent a greater harm, document everything immediately and get medical or other professional evidence to support your claim. The defence is rare and the bar is high, but this case shows it's not impossible.