Both the mens rea and actus reus of the offence of dangerous driving the focus on the manner of the accused’s driving.

The consequences of the accused’s driving should not be used in determining whether the manner of driving was dangerous (actus reus of dangerous operation of motor vehicle) or in marked departure from the standard of care of a reasonably prudent person in the circumstances (mens rea of dangerous operation of motor vehicle).
R. v. Romano, 2017 ONCA 837, at paras. 46, 68, 69, 71.
Previously it was clear that consequences of the accused’s driving (such as an accident) should not be used to determine if the manner of driving was objectively dangerous to the public (actus reus)R. v. Roy, [2012] 2 SCR 60, 2012 SCC 26 (CanLII), at para. 34. 
In the recent decision of R. v. Romano, the Court of Appeal for Ontario also makes it clear that it is an error to use the consequences of the accused’s driving in determining whether the manner of driving constituted a marked departure from the norm (mens rea).