R v Kalijundic

R. v. Kalijundic

[2008] O.J. No. 4749
Ontario Court of Justice — P.J. Hiscox J.P. | September 8, 2008

Background

Tristan Kalijundic, a novice driver with a novice licence, was practicing his motorcycle skills on Highway 115. While driving at 70 km/h, a police cruiser pulled up behind him — just five metres back, barely more than a car length. The close proximity made Kalijundic nervous, and he made a driving error: he geared down but forgot to let off the gas and disengaged the clutch. This mistake caused the front tire of his motorcycle to lift off the ground — what's commonly called a wheelie.

The officer observed the front wheel come up (estimating 12 inches, while Kalijundic said it was only 6 inches). Kalijundic immediately stopped, was polite and cooperative with the officer, and was charged under section 172(1) of the Highway Traffic Act for stunt driving. The Crown had to prove that Kalijundic intentionally performed a stunt by lifting his motorcycle's tire.

Issues

1. What constitutes "stunt driving" under section 172(1) of the Highway Traffic Act?
2. Does stunt driving require intention to perform the stunt?

The Intention Requirement

Justice Hiscox carefully analyzed the wording of section 172(1) of the Highway Traffic Act, noting that it contains three distinct prohibitions: racing or contests, performing stunts, and driving on bets or wagers. The court found that the definition of "stunt" in the regulations specifically includes "an intention to lift some or all of its tires." This intention requirement was crucial to the case.

The judge accepted Kalijundic's evidence that the wheelie was accidental — a result of nervousness and inexperience, not any deliberate attempt to show off. Justice Hiscox contrasted this with the "cowboys" he had personally seen on Highway 115 who intentionally perform wheelstands at 100+ km/h for distances of two to three kilometres. In those cases, intention would be obvious. Here, the court was satisfied that Kalijundic had no intention whatsoever to lift his tire.

Key Takeaway

Stunt driving under section 172(1) requires proof of intention — accidents don't count, even if they look impressive.

If you're charged with stunt driving for something like an accidental wheelie, burnout, or tire lift, focus your defence on the lack of intention. The Crown must prove you meant to do it, not just that it happened.