Legal Insights, Case Trends & Updates from Rory Ziv
Rory Ziv, B.A. (hons), L.L.B., L.L.M.
February 27, 2026
This Week’s Highlights
- If records are illegible, they have not been provided to the Recipient
1. NAP Review
This matter concerns a NAP in which the results from two ASD demands (the initial and appeal) formed a substantive part of the investigation. As such the last annual maintenance, current calibration and calibration expiry dates for each ASD were all required to be provided to the Recipient per the regulation. In this case, the image containing these dates was blurry and the dates were illegible.
Facts
At the time of the incident, officers were dispatched to the Recipient’s home address to investigate a report of an impaired driver. The vehicle was empty upon arrival and so the officers decided to bring an ASD to his residence and test his sobriety there. Upon arrival, the officer noticed the door ajar with keys still in the lock, and when the Recipient came to the door, they appeared to be intoxicated. The Recipient advised officers that he was drinking with his friends at the bar and had consumed four beers and a shot.
The officer read an ASD breath demand to the Recipient, who provided a sample, resulting in a ‘Fail’. At this time, the officer formed reasonable and probable grounds that the Recipient’s ability to operate a motor vehicle was impaired by alcohol. The officer explained the NAP and the right to a roadside appeal, which the Recipient took advantage of, but blew a second ‘Fail’. At this time, the officer advised the Recipient he’d be proceeding with the sanctions.
The records provided to the recipient included images of the ASD machines and their information tags. The photographs were blurry and rendered the information tags illegible.
Ruling
The Adjudicator found that the officer used the initial and appeal ASDs to issue the NAP and solidify the grounds to do so. This meant that both ASD devices were used in the investigation and factually implicated, requiring ASD records to be provided pursuant to Section 2(c) of the regulation. The three records required are the ASD’s last annual maintenance, current calibration, and calibration expiry date.
The Adjudicator considered the documents provided by police. Notably, the officer’s handwritten notes list the calibration expiry date, but do not provide the other two required records. The images provided of the ASDs and their information tags were blurry, and the Adjudicator found the text on the tags to be unreadable.
As such, the Adjudicator concluded that the records required pursuant to Section 2(c) of the regulation had not been provided to the Recipient. This resulted in the cancellation of the NAP.
Bonus Resources
- SafeRoads Alberta Portal: https://saferoads.alberta.ca
- Alberta Government – Impaired Driving Laws: https://www.alberta.ca/impaired-driving
- CanLII: Key Impaired Driving Cases in Alberta: https://www.canlii.org
Get in Touch
Have a case, ruling, or resource to share? Contact Us Online
Featured Firm
Rory Ziv and Ziv Law Group are Alberta’s trusted impaired driving lawyers, focused on defending Immediate Roadside Sanctions (IRS) and criminal impaired charges across the province. Known for their deep understanding of both administrative and criminal impaired driving law, they deliver rigorous defence strategies and timely appeal filings.