Naidu argued, inter alia, that the CPIC and ICBC checks were not necessary and took the demand outside the ASAP window. On summary conviction appeal Kelleher J noted that the 2008 amendments to section 254(3) saw the removal of "forthwith" from that section. This was relevant, held Kelleher J, and points toward a more flexible approach to the issue. Ultimately Kelleher J agreed with the trial judge that the conduct of the officer was reasonable and the steps taken during that 12 to 14 minutes were connected to the stop and arrest and did not result in the demand being made ASAP.
The Court of Appeal dismissed a further appeal by Naidu.
While making a demand as soon as one forms the requisite grounds for the demand is always best practice, Naidu confirms that so long as you are performing tasks associated with the arrest and processing of the accused - and are able to articulate those steps - which are reasonable, the demand made thereafter will be ASAP.