Click the case name for better results:

Gidden v Chief Constable of Humberside: Admn 29 Oct 2009

The driver appealed against his conviction for speeding, saying that he had not been given the requisite notice within the 14 days required: ‘The notice of intended prosecution had been sent to him by first class ordinary post in circumstances where he would ordinarily have been expected to receive it in 14 days, but in … Continue reading Gidden v Chief Constable of Humberside: Admn 29 Oct 2009

Robbie the Pict, Regina (On the Application of) v Crown Prosecution Service: Admn 24 Apr 2009

The defendant appealed against a conviction that he had driven a vehicle through a red light contrary to the provisions of section 36(1) of the Road Traffic Act 1988 and related regulations. He said that the Gatsometer device was not an approved device as required, saying that the 1991 Act required any such approval to … Continue reading Robbie the Pict, Regina (On the Application of) v Crown Prosecution Service: Admn 24 Apr 2009

Breckon v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 22 Aug 2007

The defendant appealed against his conviction for driving with excess alcohol. Held: There was no requirement that the prosecutor should produce the results of the roadside breath test in evidence, and the breathalyser was of the approved type. The appeal failed. Reliance had been placed on the fact that the guide to type approval relating … Continue reading Breckon v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 22 Aug 2007

Currie, Regina v: CACD 26 Apr 2007

The defendant appealed his conviction for dangerous driving. The failure of the police to serve him with a notice of intended prosecution invalidated the conviction. The police replied that there was no need for such a notice because there had been an accident. The driver had been stopped but had then driven off. A police … Continue reading Currie, Regina v: CACD 26 Apr 2007

Murphy v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 20 Jun 2006

The court rejected the defendant’s argument that the prosecutor should have put in evidence the results of the roadside breath test. Mitting J referred to the case of Badkin: ‘But nothing in the judgment of Glidewell LJ leads to the conclusion that in every case the prosecution must obtain from the manufacturers an analysis of … Continue reading Murphy v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 20 Jun 2006

Director of Public Prosecutions v Coulter: Admn 29 Jun 2005

The magistrates stated a case where the police officer requiring a breath speciment, had not allowed a wait of 20 minutes where the defendant had recently eaten a ‘tic-tac’, contrary to the procedure. Judges: Kennedy LJ, Crane J Citations: [2005] EWHC 1533 (Admin) Links: Bailii Statutes: Road Traffic Act 1988 7(6), Road Traffic Offenders Act … Continue reading Director of Public Prosecutions v Coulter: Admn 29 Jun 2005

Gidden v Director of Public Prosecutions: QBD 29 Oct 2009

The defendant appealed against his conviction for speeding on an appeal to the crown court. He said that he had not received the notice of intended prosecution as required within fourteen days. Held: The Act shifted the burden of proof of late delivery onto the defendant. The letter by had been sent ordinary first-class post … Continue reading Gidden v Director of Public Prosecutions: QBD 29 Oct 2009

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

Lewis, Regina (on the Application Of) v the Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 10 Dec 2004

Appeal by way of case stated from a decision convicting the appellant, of driving a motor car when he had consumed alcohol in excess of the prescribed limit, contrary to the provisions of section 5 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 and Schedule 2 Road Traffic Offenders’ Act 1988. The issue was whether the car … Continue reading Lewis, Regina (on the Application Of) v the Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 10 Dec 2004

Francis v Director of Public Prosecutions: QBD 23 Mar 2004

The defendant appealed against his conviction for having failed to identify the driver of a car caught speeding by a camera. He was the registered keeper. He completed and returned the form, but did not sign it. The statute imposed no explicit obligation to sign it. He also said that since he was already suspected … Continue reading Francis v Director of Public Prosecutions: QBD 23 Mar 2004

Mawdesley and Yorke v Chief Constable of Cheshire Constabulary and Another: Admn 31 Jul 2003

The two appellant drivers had been sent forms requiring them to identify the drivers of vehicles identified by speed cameras. They had replied providing the requested information, but the forms were unsigned. They resisted use of the forms as evidence against them. Held: The forms could not be used as evidence against the defendants on … Continue reading Mawdesley and Yorke v Chief Constable of Cheshire Constabulary and Another: Admn 31 Jul 2003

Regina (Pearson) v Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency and Another: QBD 6 Nov 2002

The appellant challenged the fact that the details of his conviction for driving with excess alcohol had not been removed from his driving licence despite it being a spent conviction under the 1974 Act. The result was that he had been unable to find work as a driver. Held: The retention of the records was … Continue reading Regina (Pearson) v Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency and Another: QBD 6 Nov 2002

Director of Public Prosecutions v McKeown and Jones: HL 20 Feb 1997

A driver was arrested for driving with excess alcohol. At the police station, he was to be tested with the Lion Intoximeter. The officer tested the machine and it calibrated correctly. This was at about a quarter after midnight; the sergeant’s watch said 00.13 am, but the time display on the machine read 23:00. Part … Continue reading Director of Public Prosecutions v McKeown and Jones: HL 20 Feb 1997

Parker v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 7 Dec 2000

The irrebuttable presumption contained in the Act that the level of alcohol contained in the accused’s blood at the time when he was stopped was no less than the level measured later that the police station, was not incompatible with the defendant’s right to a fair trial. It lay ill in the mouth of a … Continue reading Parker v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 7 Dec 2000

Director of Public Prosecutions v Bristow: QBD 28 Oct 1996

The prosecutor appealed against the decision of the magistrates, having found the defendant guilty of driving with excess alcohol, then not to disqualify him, finding special reasons for so doing. He had gone in answer to a call that a child niece was being assaulted and held against her will. Held: There may be special … Continue reading Director of Public Prosecutions v Bristow: QBD 28 Oct 1996

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

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

Robbie the Pict v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 26 Apr 2009

The defendant, a road traffic camera campaigner appealed against his conviction for contravening a red light traffic signal, saying that the camera was not approved. Held: The appeal failed. A ‘prescribed device’ was a ‘device of a description specified in an order made by the secretary of state’. The camera had been so specified in … Continue reading Robbie the Pict v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 26 Apr 2009

Director of Public Prosecutions v Alexander: Admn 27 Jul 2010

The defendant had crashed his car after driving off with a girl, and while being chased by another car driven by her boyfriend. The police first cautioned him for false imprisonment, but then prosecuted him for careless driving. The prosecutor appealed against a successful plea of autrefois convict. The defendant said that the offence for … Continue reading Director of Public Prosecutions v Alexander: Admn 27 Jul 2010

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

Brotherston and Others v The Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 3 Feb 2012

Four drivers said that the use of approved speed cameras for evidential purposes was unlawful. They argued that the cameras used were not ‘of a description specified’ under an Order. Held: The appeals failed. The different speed trap mechanisms were lawful and specified wihin the regulations. The court discussed the stages involved in the designation … Continue reading Brotherston and Others v The Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 3 Feb 2012

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

Griffiths v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 22 Mar 2007

Photographic output was part of device process The defendant appealed his conviction for speeding, complaining at the technical accuracy of the Gatso camera used, and the use of photographs developed from pictures taken by the cameras. Held: The photographs used for analysis were records produced by a prescribed device, even though not directly produced: ‘The … Continue reading Griffiths v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 22 Mar 2007

Iaciofano v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 15 Jul 2010

The defendant appealed against his conviction for speeding, saying that the device used to measure his speed was not approved. The only evidence relied on was that the officer said it had been installed in many police vehicles. Held: The magistrates had not been entitled to take judicial notice of such an opinion. Though a … Continue reading Iaciofano v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 15 Jul 2010

Acts

1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts

Regina v Haringey Magistrates’ Court ex parte Amvrosiou: Admn 13 Jun 1996

When the appellant appeared at the Magistrates’ Court to answer a charge of driving whilst uninsured, a preliminary point was taken on her behalf that the prosecution had not been commenced within 6 months of the date on which evidence sufficient in the opinion of the prosecutor to warrant proceedings had become available. In response … Continue reading Regina v Haringey Magistrates’ Court ex parte Amvrosiou: Admn 13 Jun 1996

Wayne Swan v Vehicle Inspectorate: Admn 11 Nov 1996

The Time limit for commencing a prosecution doesn’t begin to run until a person authorised to prosecute is told of the circumstances. A traffic examiner, not authorised to take a decision to prosecute could not be the ‘prosecutor’ under section 6 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988. Citations: Gazette 15-Jan-1997, Times 11-Dec-1996, [1996] EWHC … Continue reading Wayne Swan v Vehicle Inspectorate: Admn 11 Nov 1996

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

Greenway v Director of Public Prosecutions: 1993

The defendant appealed against his conviction for driving with excess alcohol. The officer had given evidence that at the time of the test all of the readings showed that the machine was working properly. That evidence was not challenged by the defence. Held: The court rejected, submissions that the print-out had not been put in … Continue reading Greenway v Director of Public Prosecutions: 1993

Beauchamp Thomson v Director of Public Prosecutions: 1989

Citations: [1989] RTR 54 Statutes: Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 15 Cited by: Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions, Regina (on the Application Of) v Chambers Admn 25-Jul-2003 The prosecutor appealed dismissal of charges of driving with excess alcohol. The defendant had admited driving, but said she had consumed alcohol in the twenty minutes between … Continue reading Beauchamp Thomson v Director of Public Prosecutions: 1989

Leetham v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 13 Oct 1997

The Appellant appeals by way of Case Stated against a decision of the Faversham and Sittingbourne Justices in Kent whereby, on 13th October 1997, they convicted him of an offence of driving while unfit through drugs, contrary to section 4(1) of the Road Traffic Act 1988 and Schedule 2 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act … Continue reading Leetham v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 13 Oct 1997