Law360 Canada ( July 7, 2026, 9:39 AM EDT) -- Appeal by appellant from an order dismissing his application for judicial review of an adjudicator’s decision confirming a Notice of Administrative Penalty (NAP) for failing or refusing to comply with a breath demand. The appellant was stopped by police following a trespass complaint and, after multiple unsuccessful attempts to provide a breath sample on an approved screening device administered by a second officer, was issued a NAP. The appellant sought review under the Provincial Administrative Penalties Act (PAPA), arguing that the director of SafeRoads Alberta failed to disclose all relevant records as required by statute, that he did not fail or refuse to comply or had a reasonable excuse, that there was a denial of procedural fairness, and that the breath demand was invalid. The adjudicator rejected these arguments, finding disclosure sufficient and holding that the focus was whether the appellant failed or refused to provide a sample, not the validity of the demand. Judicial review was dismissed as reasonable. On appeal, the appellant argued the reviewing justice erred in upholding the adjudicator’s conclusions on disclosure, procedural fairness, and the immateriality of the validity of the demand, and sought to raise additional disclosure arguments not advanced below....