The judgment of the Court

Preamble – (0:00:12)

D. The Second Question – Is section 68.1 sub 1 of the HTA Unconstitutional Because it Violates the Right to Security of the Person Under S 7 of the Charter? – (0:03:47)

(1) The governing principles: The Bedford framework – (0:04:21)

(2) The application of the governing principles from Bedford – (0:08:08)

(3) Conclusion on the application of section 7 of the Charter to the legislation – (0:11:18)

E. The Third Question – Does section 1 of the Charter Save the Legislation? – (0:13:01)

(1) Contextual considerations relating to safety regulation – (0:14:45)

(a) Safety regulation – (0:15:21)

(b) Risk assessment – (0:17:21)

(2) The constitutional scrutiny of safety regulations – (0:19:33)

(3) The application of the section 1 Charter analysis to the section 7 breach in this appeal – (0:21:19)

(a) Pressing and substantial objectives – (0:21:25)

(b) Rational connection – (0:21:58)

(c) Minimal impairment – (0:23:12)

(i) The government's regulatory approach is not unsound – (0:24:44)

(ii) The 105 km/h speed limit set for the limiter is not arbitrary – (0:26:16)

(d) The proportionality of the legislation's effects – (0:27:50)

(e) Conclusion on the section 1 Charter analysis – (0:30:55)

(4) Reflections on Bedford – (0:31:14)