The appellant appealed by case stated against his conviction by the Haringey Justices or an offence of driving a motor vehicle, having consumed excess alcohol contrary to section 5(1)(a) of the 1988 Act. He said that no direct evidence had been given that he had been driving.
Held: The appeal succeeded: ‘The question is, therefore, whether the fact of the arrest on suspicion of driving proved to the requisite standard that he had been driving. That question has to be answered in the negative given the specific finding by the justices that the arrest was on suspicion of driving. Suspicion that the appellant was driving does not amount to evidence proving that he was. There was no other evidence to the effect that he was driving.’
Judges:
Owen J
Citations:
[2004] EWHC 870 (Admin)
Links:
Statutes:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Road Traffic
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.196102