May LJ considered the need to require two samples of urine under the Road Traffic act. He said that the only construction that he could give to that subsection was to read it precisely as it reads, namely that a specimen was to be provided within one hour of the request for it, and after the provision of the previous one, and then this: ‘The medical reason why there has to be a previous specimen of urine is well known. It is to ensure that the one that is ultimately sent for analysis is a fresh specimen and properly reflects the bodily condition of the person from whom it is taken.’
Judges:
May LJ
Citations:
[1987] RTR 412
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Ryder v Crown Prosecution Service Admn 14-Apr-2011
The defendant appealed by case stated against his conviction for driving with excess alcohol, saying that the collection of a sample of urine had not been in accordance with the requirements of section 7. He had had the samples taken whilst in . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Road Traffic
Updated: 04 May 2022; Ref: scu.470574
