Search Results for: Road Traffic Act 1988 5(1)

Click the case name for better results:

Director of Public Prosecutions v Wood; Director of Public Prosecutions v McGillicuddy: Admn 19 Jan 2006

Each defendant sought disclosure of materials concerning the intoximeter instruments, having been charged with driving with excess alcohol. The defendants said that the meters were inaccurate and that the manufacturers were in effect part of the prosecution, and subject to disclosure requirements accordingly. The prosecution replied that the meter manufacturer specifications were protected as confidential. … Continue reading Director of Public Prosecutions v Wood; Director of Public Prosecutions v McGillicuddy: Admn 19 Jan 2006

Wright v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 25 May 2005

The defendant appealed his conviction for driving with excess alcohol. He complained that the device used to measure his breath at the police station, the EC/IR intoximeter, was not an approved device. The court had refused to accept evidence to support such an assertion. Held: The magistrates had found that the appellant had been lawfully … Continue reading Wright v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 25 May 2005

Zafar v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 1 Nov 2004

The defendant appealed his conviction for failing a breath test. He said that since the meter could be affected by mouth alcohol, the prosecutor had a duty to show that the reading arose from a breath taken deep from the lung by a deep breath. Held: Though the intoximeter made a distinction between deep lung … Continue reading Zafar v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 1 Nov 2004

Kemsley v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 4 Feb 2004

The defendant appealed a conviction for driving with excess alcohol. She said she had not first been cautioned when interviewed after an accident and that her admission that she had been driving should not have been allowed in evidence. Held: That admission had properly been admitted. An expert for the defence had said that the … Continue reading Kemsley v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 4 Feb 2004

Crown Prosecution Service v Bate: Admn 22 Nov 2004

Prosecutor’s appeal by way of case stated from a decision of the Birmingham Justices when they dismissed an information laid against the respondent under section 5(1)(b) Road Traffic Act 1988. Citations: [2004] EWHC 2811 (Admin) Links: Bailii Statutes: Road Traffic Act 1988 5(1)(b) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Road Traffic Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.220281

Khatibi v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 28 Jan 2004

Judges: May LJ, Nelson J Citations: [2004] EWHC 83 (Admin) Links: Bailii Statutes: Road Traffic Act 1988 5(1) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Cited – Paterson v Director of Public Prosecutions 1990 . . Cited – Regina v Jackson CACD 21-May-1996 Time should be saved by explicit admissions of all elements of expert case. . … Continue reading Khatibi v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 28 Jan 2004

Brown v Procurator Fiscal, Falkirk: HCJ 24 Sep 2002

The defendant appealed against his conviction for driving with excess alcohol. He said that the machine used to measure the alcohol in his breath did not have type approval. The schedule to Approval 1998 for the purposes of section 7(1)(a) of the Road Traffic Act referred to ‘the device known as the Intoximeter EC/IR manufactured … Continue reading Brown v Procurator Fiscal, Falkirk: HCJ 24 Sep 2002

Director of Public Prosecutions v Alderton: Admn 25 Nov 2003

The defendant had been found sat in his car. He had been spinning its wheels, but not moving. The prosecutor appealed against dismissal of a charge of attempting to drive whilst under the influence of alcohol. Held: The appeal succeeded. The defendant was driving. Although the car had not moved, his behaviour required him to … Continue reading Director of Public Prosecutions v Alderton: Admn 25 Nov 2003

Brown v Procurator Fiscal, Falkirk: HCJ 8 Mar 2002

The defendant appealed against his conviction for driving with excess alcohol. He complained that the machine used to take his sample of breath did not conform to the necessary type. It had been manufactured by an independent company. Though not approved it was identical to the approved machine. He was convicted on the basis that … Continue reading Brown v Procurator Fiscal, Falkirk: HCJ 8 Mar 2002

Huntley, Regina (on the Application of) v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 2 Apr 2004

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, … Continue reading Huntley, Regina (on the Application of) v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 2 Apr 2004

Crown Prosecution Service v Paul O’Shea: Admn 11 May 1998

Prosecutor’s appeal against dismissal of charge of driving with excess alcohol. Citations: [1998] EWHC Admin 517 Links: Bailii Statutes: Road Traffic Act 1988 5(1)(a) Citing: Cited – Regina v Absolam CACD 1990 A was arrested. He was already on bail for possession of cannabis, and in the hope finding further evidence he was asked to … Continue reading Crown Prosecution Service v Paul O’Shea: Admn 11 May 1998

Director of Public Prosecutions v Tucker: Admn 6 Nov 1996

Citations: [1996] EWHC Admin 198 Links: Bailii Statutes: Road Traffic Act 1988 5(1)(a) Citing: Cited – Taylor v Rajan 2-Jan-1974 The defendant had consumed alcohol so that the alcohol level was 102 milligrammes of alcohol in 100 millilitres of blood. An appeal was heard as to whether there existed special reasons for not disqualifying him. … Continue reading Director of Public Prosecutions v Tucker: Admn 6 Nov 1996

Director of Public Prosecutions v Spurrier: QBD 21 Jul 1999

It was not absolutely necessary for a defendant who asserted that a Lion Intoximeter was faulty because of a disparity between the reading and what had been drunk, to bring expert evidence to rebut the statutory presumption that the Intoximeter was in working order. A court could reach such a conclusion without such evidence, but … Continue reading Director of Public Prosecutions v Spurrier: QBD 21 Jul 1999

Director of Public Prosecutions v Humphries: QBD 3 Dec 1999

Following a conviction for driving with excess alcohol, the defendant argued that the short (nil) distance driven constituted a special reason for not disqualifying him. The court said that the magistrates were entitled to take into account the defendant’s intention, over and above what had actually been achieved by him in driving away. Citations: Times … Continue reading Director of Public Prosecutions v Humphries: QBD 3 Dec 1999

Ridehalgh, Regina (on the Application of) v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 23 May 2005

The appellant a police officer had arrived at work having been drinking. A senior officer asked if he had driven to work. He replied yes, and on that basis had been convicted of driving with excess alcohol. He appealed saying that the question should have been put to him under caution. The magistrates said: ‘we … Continue reading Ridehalgh, Regina (on the Application of) v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 23 May 2005

Smith v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 30 Jan 2007

The defendant appealed his conviction for driving with excess alcohol, arguing that the prosecution had failed to provide the roadside breath test figures. Held: The appeal failed, and was indeed hopeless. Pill LJ said: ‘The specimens of breath which established whether or not a defendant has committed an offence under section 5(1) of the 1988 … Continue reading Smith v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 30 Jan 2007

Regina v Burton Upon Trent Magistrates Court Ex Parte Woolley: QBD 17 Nov 1994

An injured suspect should still be asked why a blood specimen should not to be taken. A failure to follow the statutory procedure to request a blood sample in hospital had misled the driver. Citations: Independent 27-Jan-1995, Independent 29-Dec-1994, Times 17-Nov-1994 Statutes: Road Traffic Act 1988 5(1)(a) Road Traffic Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.86259

Ng v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 26 Jan 2007

Defendant convicted for driving wth excess alcohol – Appeal against finding that no special reasons for reducing penalty – belch during breath test artificially raising reading. Citations: [2007] EWHC 36 (Admin) Links: Bailii Statutes: Road Traffic Offenders Act 34(1), Road Traffic Act 1988 5(1)(a) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Road Traffic Updated: 06 April 2022; Ref: … Continue reading Ng v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 26 Jan 2007

Planton v Director of Public Prosecutions: QBD 6 Jun 2001

The defendant was found by police sat in the driving seat of a car parked on an isthmus which would be submerged at high tide. The engine was running, and the car lights were on. He failed a breath test, but argued at trial that since the car had not been moving, he could not … Continue reading Planton v Director of Public Prosecutions: QBD 6 Jun 2001

Goldsmith v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 4 Nov 2009

The court was asked whether a defendant who pleads guilty to an offence of driving with excess alcohol contrary to section 5(1)(a) of the Road Traffic Act 1988, and therefore admits that he was driving ‘over the limit’, can seek a Newton hearing to contest the amount by which the prosecution allege he was over … Continue reading Goldsmith v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 4 Nov 2009

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 hospital from a catheter bag. He said there had not been two samples. … Continue reading Ryder v Crown Prosecution Service: Admn 14 Apr 2011

Mason v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 15 Jul 2009

The defendant appealed against his conviction for attempting to drive after consuming excess alcohol. On reporting to the police that as he opened the door of his car, he had been threatened with a knife, and his car taken, it was suspected he had consumed alcohol, and he was arrested. Held: The conviction was quashed. … Continue reading Mason v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 15 Jul 2009

Director of Public Prosecutions v Moore: Admn 2 Mar 2010

The defendant appealed by case stated from his conviction of attempting to drive a motor vehicle on a public road, having consumed alcohol in excess of the prescribed limit on the same occasion. At the time he was said to have attempted to drive, the car was no longer on a public road. The appellant … Continue reading Director of Public Prosecutions v Moore: Admn 2 Mar 2010

Steadman v Director of Public Prosecutions: QBD 15 Apr 2002

The motorist was to be asked to take a breath test at the police station. The defendant was asked if he was on medication, and he produced a pill. The officer went ahead wit the test. At court the defendant said that he should first have sought medical advice to see whether he was fit … Continue reading Steadman v Director of Public Prosecutions: QBD 15 Apr 2002

Director of Public Prosecutions v Saddington; Chief Constable of the North Yorkshire Police v Michael Saddington: Admn 1 Nov 2000

A motorised scooter of the type known as a ‘Go-Ped’ was a motor vehicle within the Act. Accordingly a driving licence and third party insurance were both required for its use on a public highway. The scooter required the passenger to stand on a small platform, and was powered by a 22.5cc engine. The braking … Continue reading Director of Public Prosecutions v Saddington; Chief Constable of the North Yorkshire Police v Michael Saddington: Admn 1 Nov 2000

Coates v Crown Prosecution Service: Admn 29 Jul 2011

The defendant appealed by case stated against his conviction for driving a Segway scooter on a footpath. He denied that it was ‘a mechanically propelled vehicle intended or adapted for use on roads.’ Held: The appeal failed. The district judge had correctly read and applied the authorities. The manufacturer’s statement that the Segway was not … Continue reading Coates v Crown Prosecution Service: Admn 29 Jul 2011

A and others v Secretary of State for the Home Department (No 2): HL 8 Dec 2005

Evidence from 3rd Party Torture Inadmissible The applicants had been detained following the issue of certificates issued by the respondent that they posed a terrorist threat. They challenged the decisions of the Special Immigration Appeals Commission saying that evidence underlying the decisions had probably been obtained by torture committed by foreign powers, and should not … Continue reading A and others v Secretary of State for the Home Department (No 2): HL 8 Dec 2005

Sheldrake v Director of Public Prosecutions; Attorney General’s Reference No 4 of 2002: HL 14 Oct 2004

Appeals were brought complaining as to the apparent reversal of the burden of proof in road traffic cases and in cases under the Terrorism Acts. Was a legal or an evidential burden placed on a defendant? Held: Lord Bingham of Cornhill said: ‘The overriding concern is that a trial should be fair, and the presumption … Continue reading Sheldrake v Director of Public Prosecutions; Attorney General’s Reference No 4 of 2002: HL 14 Oct 2004

Coates, Regina v: Misc 18 Jan 2011

(Barnsley Magistrates Court) The defendant owned a Segway, a two wheeled vehicle. He was charged with having driven it on a public footpath despite its being a motor vehicle. He denied that it was a motor vehicle ‘adapted or intended for use on the road’. Held: ‘If I am satisfied from all the evidence presented, … Continue reading Coates, Regina v: Misc 18 Jan 2011

A v Secretary of State for the Home Department, and X v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 16 Dec 2004

The applicants had been imprisoned and held without trial, being suspected of international terrorism. No criminal charges were intended to be brought. They were foreigners and free to return home if they wished, but feared for their lives if they did. A British subject, who was suspected in the exact same way, and there were … Continue reading A v Secretary of State for the Home Department, and X v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 16 Dec 2004