INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION
If a disqualification notice is mailed to a person by registered mail and is not returned, the person is deemed to have knowledge of the disqualification after five days from the mailing date.
SECTION WORDING
260(4) In the absence of evidence to the contrary, where it is proved that a disqualification referred to in paragraph 259(5)(b) has been imposed on a person and that notice of the disqualification has been mailed by registered or certified mail to that person, that person shall, after five days following the mailing of the notice, be deemed to have received the notice and to have knowledge of the disqualification, of the date of its commencement and of its duration.
EXPLANATION
Section 260(4) of the Criminal Code of Canada is an important provision that outlines the legal process for imposing a disqualification on an individual convicted of an offence. This section specifically deals with situations where a disqualification has been imposed on an individual under paragraph 259(5)(b) of the Criminal Code, which refers to disqualifications related to operating a motor vehicle. The provision states that in the absence of evidence to the contrary, where it is proven that a disqualification has been imposed on a person and that notice of the disqualification has been mailed by registered or certified mail to that person, the individual shall be deemed to have received the notice and to have knowledge of the disqualification, of the date of its commencement, and of its duration five days following the mailing of the notice. This means that if an individual is convicted of a motor vehicle offence that results in a disqualification, the court will be responsible for issuing the notice of the disqualification, which must be sent by registered or certified mail. Once the notice has been sent, if the individual does not provide evidence to the contrary that they did not receive the notice, they will be deemed to have received it five days following its mailing. This provision is important because it ensures that individuals who have been disqualified from operating a motor vehicle are aware of the disqualification and its terms. It also serves as a basis for criminal proceedings in situations where an individual is found to have violated their disqualification and claims they were unaware of its terms.
COMMENTARY
Section 260(4) of the Criminal Code of Canada outlines a legal presumption that can be used when proving the knowledge of a disqualification by an individual. The section applies to cases where a disqualification has been imposed on a person and notice of the disqualification has been mailed to them. The presumption states that in the absence of evidence to the contrary, if it is proven that notice of the disqualification was mailed by registered or certified mail to the person, they shall be deemed to have received the notice and to have knowledge of the disqualification, its commencement date, and its duration, five days following the mailing of the notice. This legal presumption is important because it helps to ensure that individuals who are disqualified from things like driving or possessing firearms are aware of their disqualification and the consequences of violating it. Without this presumption, individuals who claim to have had no knowledge of their disqualification could potentially avoid consequences for their actions. However, it is important to note that this presumption can be rebutted. If there is evidence to the contrary that suggests that the person did not receive the notice, they may be able to argue that they were not aware of their disqualification. For example, if the notice was mailed to the wrong address or was not received due to a postal error, the person may be able to argue that they did not receive it and were therefore not aware of their disqualification. In practice, this section of the Criminal Code is often used in cases involving driving disqualifications. When someone is disqualified from driving, they are required to surrender their driver's license and receive notice of their disqualification. If they are later found driving while disqualified, they can be charged with a criminal offense. In these cases, prosecutors will often rely on this legal presumption to show that the person was aware of their disqualification and knew that they were not allowed to drive. Overall, Section 260(4) of the Criminal Code of Canada plays an important role in ensuring that individuals who are disqualified from certain activities are aware of their disqualification and the consequences of violating it. While it is not a conclusive presumption, it creates a strong presumption that can be difficult to rebut without significant evidence to the contrary.
STRATEGY
Section 260(4) of the Criminal Code of Canada is an important provision that allows a person to be deemed to have knowledge of a disqualification imposed on them, even if they claim to have not received the notice. This provision is particularly useful when dealing with individuals who are trying to evade their obligations and are not responding to the disqualification. There are several strategic considerations when dealing with this section of the Criminal Code. Firstly, it is important to ensure that the notice of disqualification is properly mailed by registered or certified mail, as required under the provision. This will provide proof of the mailing and help establish that the notice was sent to the correct address. Secondly, it is important to ensure that the notice is mailed to the correct address. If the notice is not sent to the correct address, the person may not receive it and may challenge the disqualification on the basis that they did not have knowledge of it. Therefore, it is important to take steps to verify the correct address and ensure that the notice is sent to that address. Thirdly, it may be useful to follow up with the person after the notice has been mailed to confirm that they have received it and are aware of the disqualification. This can be done by sending a second notice or by contacting the person directly. By doing so, it can help mitigate any potential challenges to the disqualification on the basis that the person did not receive the notice or was not aware of the disqualification. Fourthly, it may be useful to keep detailed records of the steps taken to notify the person of the disqualification and their response (if any). This can be helpful in case the person challenges the disqualification and can be used as evidence to establish that they had knowledge of the disqualification. In terms of strategies that could be employed, one approach could be to use a combination of email, phone, and regular mail to notify the person of the disqualification. This can help increase the chances of the person receiving the notice and can help establish that they had knowledge of the disqualification. Another strategy could be to provide the person with additional information about the disqualification and its consequences. This can help the person understand the seriousness of the situation and may motivate them to comply with the disqualification. Overall, section 260(4) of the Criminal Code of Canada is an important tool for ensuring that individuals who are subject to a disqualification are aware of it and are complying with it. By taking strategic steps to notify the person of the disqualification and confirming their awareness of it, it can help mitigate potential challenges and ensure that the disqualification is being enforced properly.