The main ground in the judicial review was that the appellant did not have the two valid tests to which he was entitled. The reviewing judge examined the decision in McConachie, 2014 BCSC 2009, but found the reasoning in Ricard v. British Columbia (Superintendent of Motor Vehicles), 2014 BCSC 129, and in Bro v. British Columbia (Superintendent of Motor Vehicles), 2014 BCSC 1682, more persuasive. He followed Ricard in deciding that it was not unreasonable for the adjudicator to have based her confirmation of the prohibition on the results of the second test alone.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.