It was a Police Constable’s responsibility to decide whether a blood or urine specimen was to be taken. He needn’t offer the urine option: ‘it is clear that under section 8(2) the driver, in order that he may decide whether or not to claim that the breath specimen be replaced, should be fully informed of … Continue reading Director of Public Prosecutions v Warren: HL 9 Dec 1992
Requirement for blood test not invalidated by not asking before refusal. Citations: Times 13-Mar-1997 Statutes: Road Traffic Act 1988 7(3) Road Traffic Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.86340
A mistaken belief in the mind of the Police Constable that the Intoximeter was inaccurate, does not prevent the admission of the reading. Citations: Ind Summary 11-Dec-1995, Times 14-Nov-1995 Statutes: Road Traffic Act 1988 7(3) Road Traffic Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.81135
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
When requesting a drink driver suspect to give a specimen of blood, an officer’s failure to say that the specimen will be taken by a doctor was not fatal to the prosecution. The issue of whether the blood sample was to be taken had properly been described by the officer as a decision for the … Continue reading Director of Public Prosecutions v Jackson, Stanley v Director of Public Prosecutions: HL 29 Jul 1998
Where a motorist told an officer at the roadside that he suffered from bronchitis, and could not provide a specimen of breath, and he wanted to rely upon the same reason at the police station, he could not claim that the officer in the station should know of his objection, but should make it clear … Continue reading Director of Public Prosecutions v Lonsdale: QBD 16 Feb 2001
The arrested driver was given a warning under section 7(7) before two specimens of breath were obtained. The officer thought the specimens unreliable being of uneven volume. The officer then gave the appellant the chance to repeat the breath analysis procedure, but stressed that the appellant was under no obligation to do so. The appellant … Continue reading Jubb v Director of Public Prosecutions: 2002