If the section of the code applicable to the two-beer test had a mandatory audiovisual requirement and a set of regulations, which I suppose will have to be outside the code, as to how the equipment is to be maintained, the records of that, if a regime were in place, would the Canadian Bar Association still be opposed to the section as it is worded now, in effect taking away the defence that's evolved out of that section and through interpretation?
Si l'article du Code correspondant au test des deux bières était assorti d'une série de règlements et de l'obligation d'avoir un document audiovisuel, l'Association du Barreau canadien serait-elle tout de même contre cet article sous sa forme actuelle? J'imagine que les règlements sur l'entretien des appareils, la tenue des dossiers ne pourraient figurer dans le Code proprement dit.
