What is the scope of the fundamental justice and fair trial rights under section 94(2) of the Motor Vehicle Act?

We can assume that the trial judge had in mind the fundamental justice rights in s. 7 or the fair trial rights in s. 11(d). In Reference re: Section 94(2) of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1985 CanLII 81 (SCC), [1985] 2 S.C.R. 486 at 503, Lamer J. held that the principles of fundamental justice “are to be found in the basic tenets of our legal system”. But, as Sopinka J. said in Rodriguez v. British Columbia (Attorney General), 1993 CanLII 75 (SCC), [1993] 3 S.C.R. 519 at 591, these principles must not be so broad “as to be no more than vague generalizations about what our society considers to be ethical or moral”. Either under s. 7 or s. 11(d) an accused has a right, for example, to disclosure and to make full answer and defence. As an element of the right to make full answer and defence an accused has a right to adduce relevant and admissible evidence. As McLachlin J. said in R. v. Seaboyer, 1991 CanLII 76 (SCC), [1991] 2 S.C.R. 577 at 608: The right of the innocent not to be convicted is dependent on the right to present full answer and defence. This, in turn, depends on being able to call the evidence necessary to establish a defence and to challenge the evidence called by the prosecution.