The R. v. Boudreault case (see November 25, 2012 blog entry) from the Supreme Court of Canada was released late in 2012 and Canadian Courts have been applying it since that time. The Manitoba Court of Appeal has reviewed the law concerning care or control in Mr. Steuart's application for leave to appeal:
In the absence of a contemporaneous intention to drive, a realistic risk of danger may arise in at least three ways. First, an inebriated person who initially does not intend to drive may later, while still impaired, change his or her mind and proceed to do so; second, an inebriated person behind the wheel may unintentionally set the vehicle in motion; and third, through negligence, bad judgment or otherwise, a stationary or inoperable vehicle may endanger persons or property.
Consequently, even if an accused satisfies the court that he did not occupy the driver’s seat with an intention to drive, this will not necessarily result in an acquittal. Nor will it automatically result in a conviction. In the absence of an intention to drive, what will be required to convict is that there be a realistic risk of danger given the particular facts of the case. R. v. Steuart, 2014 MBCA 7