# Dayton Kelly v. His Majesty the King (42050)

Page: https://stenobird.com/podcast/supreme-court-of-canada-hearings-floor-audio-6708170/dayton-kelly-v-his-majesty-the-king-42050
Text version: https://stenobird.com/podcast/supreme-court-of-canada-hearings-floor-audio-6708170/dayton-kelly-v-his-majesty-the-king-42050.md
Podcast: [Supreme Court of Canada Hearings (Floor Audio)](https://stenobird.com/podcast/supreme-court-of-canada-hearings-floor-audio-6708170)
Published: 2026-03-18T14:26:32+00:00
Episode link: https://www.scchearings.ca/e/dayton-kelly-v-his-majesty-the-king-42050
Audio file: https://mcdn.podbean.com/mf/web/dn5a4yy21sy0rtvd/2026-03-17-42050-floor.mp3
Processing state: not_requested
JSON: https://stenobird.com/v1/public/podcasts/supreme-court-of-canada-hearings-floor-audio-6708170/episodes/dayton-kelly-v-his-majesty-the-king-42050
Duration seconds: 2240

## Resource

One evening in October 2021, the applicant was driving in rural southwestern Ontario. The sun had set and it was dark. The posted speed limit on the highway the applicant was using was 80km/h; he was travelling at least 116km/h. A horse-drawn buggy entered the roadway at an intersection. The applicant did not see the buggy in time to stop; his vehicle collided with it. Both occupants of the buggy died from injuries sustained in the collision. During the police investigation that night, the applicant admitted to being a chronic marijuana smoker and consented to providing two samples of his blood. Evidence established that the applicant’s blood drug concentration (“BDC”) exceeded the prescribed limit at the time of the collision. The parties agreed at trial that there was no evidence of a causal nexus between the applicant’s BDC and the collision. The applicant was charged with operating a conveyance with an excess BDC under s. 320.14(1)(c), two counts of committing an offence under s. 320.14(1)(c) causing death under s. 320.14(3), and two counts of dangerous operation of a conveyance causing death under s. 320.13(3).The trial judge held that it is insufficient that the applicant had a prohibited BDC and was operating a conveyance at the time he caused a death; a conviction for offences under s. 320.14(3) requires a causal nexus between an accused’s BDC and the death of a victim. As the parties have agreed that there is no causal nexus between the applicant’s BDC and the death of the victims, the applicant was acquitted on those counts.The Court of Appeal held that the trial judge erred in his interpretation of s. 320.14(3). A plain reading establishes that the elements are made out simply by operating a vehicle with excess BDC, and causing the death of a person. No caus…

## Actions

- request_transcript: `POST https://stenobird.com/v1/public/podcasts/supreme-court-of-canada-hearings-floor-audio-6708170/episodes/dayton-kelly-v-his-majesty-the-king-42050/transcription-requests` — Idempotently request low-priority transcript generation for this episode.
- read_markdown: `GET https://stenobird.com/podcast/supreme-court-of-canada-hearings-floor-audio-6708170/dayton-kelly-v-his-majesty-the-king-42050.md` — Read the agent-friendly Markdown representation of this episode resource.

A page view does not enqueue transcription. Agents should invoke `request_transcript` explicitly when they need this episode processed.

## Transcript

Full transcripts are not published on public pages unless there is a clear rights basis.