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 approval was of a type of a machine, not of a machine.


Lord Cameron of Lochbroom and Lord Hamilton and Lord Morison


[2002] ScotHC 25




Road Traffic Act 1988 5(1)(a)




CitedChief Constable of Northumbria v Brown 1986
The defendant had been convicted of driving with excess alcohol. He challenged the use of a machine for the breath test which was not an Intoximeter.
Held: The charge was valid. . .

Cited by:

CitedGrant v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 22-Jan-2003
The appellant had been convicted of failing to give a breath test, and of driving with excess alcohol. He had falsely claimed that he had had a drink in the five minutes before being asked to take the test, and said the officer should not have . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Road Traffic

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.170500