Wood v Milne: QBD 1987

The ‘state of the vehicle’ includes the manufactured condition of the vehicle. As a matter of construction, it was not necessary to prove a lack of maintenance in order to prove a breach of the Regulations

Citations:

Times 27-Mar-1987

Statutes:

Motor Vehicle (Construction and Use Regulations 1978

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedRegina v Marchant and Another CACD 21-Jul-2003
The second defendant, a farmer, employed the first defendant, inter alia, to drive his tractor. The tractor, when fitted up was necessarily dangerous, but was licensed to be driven on the roads. There was a fatal accident on the highway. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Road Traffic

Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.185939

Regina v Strong: 1995

‘obvious to a careful and competent driver’ refers to a dangerous state which would be ‘seen or realised at first glance’

Citations:

[1995] Crim LR 428

Statutes:

Road Traffic Act 1988 2A

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedRegina v Roberts and George CACD 31-Jul-1996
The defendants, a lorry driver and his employer, appealed against convictions for causing death by dangerous driving, and procuring the same. A wheel came loose from the wagon on the motorway, and collided with another vehicle, killing the driver. . .
CitedRegina v Marchant and Another CACD 21-Jul-2003
The second defendant, a farmer, employed the first defendant, inter alia, to drive his tractor. The tractor, when fitted up was necessarily dangerous, but was licensed to be driven on the roads. There was a fatal accident on the highway. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Road Traffic

Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.183059

Regina v Derwentside Justices, Ex parte Heaviside: 1996

Establishing whether previous convictions listed were those of the defendant.

Citations:

[1996] RTR 384

Cited by:

CitedRegina v Mauricia CACD 25-Feb-2002
The defendant sought to assert that he was of previous good character. The prosecution knew of convictions abroad, and sought to admit them in rebuttal. The 1984 Act did not deal with foreign convictions.
Held: The 1851 Act still applied, and . .
CitedRegina v Burns CACD 1-Mar-2006
The defendant complained that the court had wrongfully admitted evidence of a previous conviction on the basis only that he shared the name and date of birth of the person convicted. The conviction was used as evidence of his propensity to be . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Road Traffic

Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.182848

Hosier v Goodall: QBD 1962

A notice of intended prosecution was sent to the defendant in connection with an allegation of driving without due care and attention. When the matter came before the court, the defendant argued that the prosecution had failed to meet the requirements of section 241. Following a car acident the defendant had been unconscious in hospital. Attempts to serve him with papers at hospital had failed, and a notice was sent by registered letter to his home. His wife received it, but she did not give it to him despite his having recovered sufficiently to have read it. The prosecutor appealed against a finding that he had not been served.
Held: The appeal succeeded. There had been good service since the wife was deemed to be authorised for this purpose.

Citations:

[1962] 2 QB 40, [1962] 1 All ER 30, [1962] WLR 157

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedBeanby Estates Ltd v Egg Stores (Stamford Hill) Ltd ChD 9-May-2003
The landlord had served a notice under the 1954 Act. The tenant served a counter notice, but the question was whether he was late, or out of time.
Held: The combination of the various provisions meant that the landlord’s notice had irrevocably . .
CitedSyed (Curtailment of Leave – Notice) India UTIAC 4-Mar-2013
UTIAC (1) The Immigration (Notices) Regulations 2003 do not apply to a decision under the Immigration Act 1971, which is not an immigration decision within the meaning of section 82 of the Nationality, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Road Traffic, Magistrates

Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.182413

Chatters v Burke: QBD 1986

A car had rolled over and stopped in a field next to the highway and was then driven with a flat tyre a few yards from the field through a gate, onto the road and parked there.
Held: In determining whether special reasons existed to justify the non-disqualification of the driver for driving over the limit, it was relevant to take into account how the vehicle was driven, the manner in which it was driven, the state of the vehicle and whether the driver intended to drive any further, the prevailing road and traffic conditions, whether there was any possibility of danger by contact with other road users, and the reason for the vehicle being driven at all.

Judges:

Watkins LJ, Taylor J

Citations:

[1986] RTR 396, [1986] 3 All ER 168

Cited by:

InterpretedDirector 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 . .
CitedDirector of Public Prosecutions v Conroy Admn 23-Jun-2003
The DPP appealed a finding of special reasons for not disqualifying the defendant after finding him guilty of driving with excess alcohol. He had been stopped driving at excess speed, he had driven over a mile and had a further two hundred yards to . .
CitedKhan, Regina (on the Application of) v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 12-Oct-2004
Defendant pleaded guity to drink driving – claim for special reasons – appeal against finding of absence of special reasons to disqualify. . .
CitedDirector 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 . .
CitedDavies v Crown Prosecution Service (Bradford) Admn 13-May-2009
The defendant appealed against a decision not to find special reasons for not endorsing lis licence on his plea of guilty to speeding. He was a diabetic and had anticipated an hypoglycaemic attack. He had increased his speed so as to be able to draw . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Road Traffic

Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.180433

Regina (Maud) v Castle Point Borough Council: CA 2 Oct 2002

The council decided after consultation and advice to issue licences for hackney carriages, removing the limit on the number of such licences, and allowing Hackney Carriages vehicles to pick up passengers from cab ranks. The taxi owners sought to challenge the decision by way of judicial review.
Held: The section allowed the council to restrict the number of licences, only if satisfied that there was no unmet need. The council had not taken into account any irrelevant or improper matter, and the review was refused. The imposition of restrictions on some licences would create a second class system, and the council was correct not to do this.

Judges:

Lords Justice Kennedy, Buxton and Keene

Citations:

Gazette 13-Mar-2003

Statutes:

Transport Act 1985 16, Town Police Clauses Act 1847

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Licensing, Road Traffic, Local Government

Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.177491

Director of Public Prosecutions v Andrew Earle Anthony Brown, Jose Teixeira: QBD 16 Nov 2001

Where a defendant to a charge of driving with excess alcohol, sought to test the accuracy of the Intoximeter, the Magistrates should consider whether the evidence was as to the particular Intoximeter used, and was of sufficient quality to displace the presumption in law that the Intoximeter system in general works. The evidence in such cases did not go to the ability of the equipment to measure the levels of alcohol in the deep lungs. Evidence that the machines might misread alcohol held in the mouth was not relevant since each defendant admitted that no such alcohol was present. Evidence should not be put before the Court as to whether the ECIR instrument should not have received the approval of the Secretary of State and/or that approval should have been revoked and/or that it had been modified

Judges:

Lord Justice Pill, Mr Justice Cresswell

Citations:

Times 03-Dec-2001, [2002] RTR 395, CO/3794/2001, CO/3710/2001

Statutes:

Road Traffic Act 1988 5 15(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

ApprovedRegina v Skegness Magistrates’ Court ex parte Cardy 1985
Representations that the Intoximeter or other device used for measuring breath alcohol, should not have been approved or that the Secretary of State should have withdrawn approval in respect of the device should be addressed to the Secretary of . .

Cited by:

CitedDirector of Public Prosecutions v Memery QBD 4-Jul-2002
The Crown Court had concluded that the intoximeter EC/IR was not a validly approved device or if it was that it was unreasonable for the Secretary of State to have approved it since it was a device which detected mouth alcohol, i.e. was liable to . .
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 . .
CitedDirector 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 . .
CitedRose v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 11-Mar-2010
The defendant appealed by case stated his conviction of driving with excess alcohol. He said that the device used was not an approved one. He also said that the reading was invaid in including a reading of mouth alcohol. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Road Traffic, Evidence

Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.166814

Director of Public Prosecutions v Nesbit; Director of Public Prosecutions v Duffy etc: QBD 2 Feb 1994

Suspect at hospital to be told of reason before blood specimen required. He should be told of the fact that only a blood test will be accepted whilst at the station.
PC to say breath tests only at station before requiring specimen at hospital.

Citations:

Times 02-Feb-1994, Gazette 02-Mar-1994

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Road Traffic

Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.80036

Regina v Lawrence (Stephen): HL 1981

The defendant had ridden a motor-cycle and hit a pedestrian. The court asked whether he had been reckless.
Held: The House understood recklessness as ‘a state of mind stopping short of deliberate intention, and going beyond mere inadvertence’ and ‘It is for the jury to decide whether the risk created by the manner in which the vehicle was being driven was both obvious and serious and, in deciding this, they may apply the standard of the ordinary prudent motorist as represented by themselves. If satisfied that an obvious and serious risk was created by the manner of the defendant’s driving, the jury are entitled to infer that he was in one or other of the states of mind required to constitute the offence and will probably do so; but regard must be given to any explanation he gives as to his state of mind which may displace the inference.’
Lord Diplock: ‘Recklessness on the part of the doer of an act does presuppose that there is something in the circumstances that would have drawn the attention of an ordinary prudent individual to the possibility that this act was capable of causing the kind of serious harmful consequences that the section which creates the offence was intended to prevent, and that the risk of those harmful consequences occurring was not so slight that an ordinary prudent individual would feel justified in treating them as negligible. It is only when this is so that the doer of the act is acting ‘recklessly’ if before doing the act, he either fails to give any thought to the possibility of there being any such risk or, having recognised that there was such risk, he nevertheless goes on to do it.’

Judges:

Lord Diplock and Lord Roskill, Lord Hailsham of St Marylebone LC

Citations:

[1981] 2 WLR 524, [1982] AC 510, (1981) 73 Cr App R 1, [1981] 1 All ER 974

Statutes:

Road Traffic Act 1972 1

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedCommissioner of Police v Caldwell HL 19-Mar-1981
The defendant got drunk and set fire to the hotel where he worked. Guests were present. He was indicted upon two counts of arson. He pleaded guilty to the 1(1) count but contested the 1(2) charge, saying he was so drunk that the thought there might . .

Cited by:

ConfirmedRegina v Hinks HL 27-Oct-2000
A woman befriending an older man of limited intelligence accepted daily cash payments from his building society over eight months, claiming them to be gifts. She now appealed against her conviction for theft.
Held: (Lord Hutton dissenting) For . .
ApprovedRegina v G and R HL 16-Oct-2003
The defendants, young boys, had set fire to paper and thrown the lit papers into a wheelie bin, expecting the fire to go out. In fact substantial damage was caused. The House was asked whether a conviction was proper under the section where the . .
AppliedRegina v Miller HL 17-Mar-1982
The defendant, a vagrant, fell asleep in an empty house. His lighted cigarette fell onto his mattress, and a fire started. Rather than put it out, he moved to another room. He was accused of arson.
Held: He was guilty. A defendant would be . .
CitedElliott v C 1983
A 14-year old girl of low intelligence entered a shed, poured white spirit on the floor and set it alight. The fire destroyed the shed after she left. The allegation was that she was reckless. The justices applied Caldwell but inferred that in his . .
CitedRegina v Reid HL 1992
The defendant, convicted of causing death by reckless driving contrary asked the House to reconsider its decision in Lawrence on which the trial judge’s jury direction had been based.
Held: Lawrence remained good. (Lord Keith) ‘where the . .
CitedData Protection Registrar v Amnesty International (British Section) Admn 8-Nov-1994
The defendants had been charged with recklessly holding and then disclosing information about named individuals. It had exchanged a list of potential addressee’s for use in mailing lists with another charity.
Held: Recklessness is defined by . .
CitedRegina v Goodfellow CACD 1986
The defendant had failed to get re-housed. He planned to burn down his present lodgings, rescuing the other inhabitants. Three died in his attempt. He appealed a conviction for manslaughter.
Held: The case was either an unlawful act or . .
CitedBrown v The Queen (Jamaica) PC 13-Apr-2005
A police officer appealed against his conviction for manslaughter after being involved in a road traffic accident. Two were killed. The policemen complained as to the direction given on gross negligence manslaughter.
Held: Adomako could not . .
AppliedKong Cheuk Kwan v The Queen PC 10-Jul-1985
Two hydrofoils collided, causing deaths. The officers were charged with manslaughter.
Held: The Board applied to the situation the law which had developed for road traffic accidents. . .
CitedRegina v Conway CACD 28-Jul-1988
The defendant appealed against his conviction for reckless driving. He said the offence was committed out of necessity, since his passenger’s life was under threat.
Held: Necessity can only be a defence to a charge of reckless driving where . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Road Traffic

Updated: 27 April 2022; Ref: scu.179855

Fundo de Garantia Automovel v Juliana: ECJ 4 Sep 2018

Compulsory Insurance v Civil Liability In Respect of The Use of Motor Vehicles – Judgment – Reference for a preliminary ruling – Compulsory insurance against civil liability in respect of the use of motor vehicles – Directive 72/166/EEC – Article 3(1) – Second Directive 84/5/EEC – Article 1(4) – Obligation to take out a contract of insurance – Vehicle parked on private land – Right of the compensation body to bring an action against the owner of the uninsured vehicle

Citations:

C-80/17, [2018] EUECJ C-80/17, ECLI:EU:C:2018:661

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Road Traffic

Updated: 27 April 2022; Ref: scu.621627

Director of Public Prosecutions v Manchester and Salford Magistrates’ Court: Admn 7 Jul 2017

Prosecutions brought against motorists in unconnected circumstances for driving a motor vehicle on a road or other public place after consuming so much alcohol that the proportion if it in their respective breath exceeded the prescribed limit, contrary to s. 5 of the Road Traffic Act 1988. The same defence solicitors have appeared and, in both cases, defence statements have been served which deny the consumption of sufficient alcohol to give rise to a positive reading and challenge the reliability of the Lion Intoxilyzer device used in the procedure. Pursuant to these statements, applications have been made under s. 8 of the 1996 Act for comprehensive documentation concerning the relevant device, relying on expert evidence to the effect that there must have been some defect in the device: the evidence proceeds on the unstated premise that what is said by each of the motorists as to their alcohol consumption is accurate.

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 3719 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Practice, Road Traffic

Updated: 25 April 2022; Ref: scu.619950

Gatenby, Regina (on Application of) v Newton Ayecliffe Magistrates’ Court: Admn 1 Dec 2017

Challenge to the decision of the Magistrates to endorse the driving licence of the claimant with 10 penalty points following his plea of guilty to an offence of failing to provide a specimen of breath for analysis contrary to Section 7, subsection 6, of the Road Traffic Act.

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 3772 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Road Traffic

Updated: 25 April 2022; Ref: scu.619957

Dorning v Personal Representative of Paul Rigby (Deceased): CA 13 Dec 2007

The claimant motorcyclist appealed dismissal of his claim for damages. Another motorcycle rider had failed to negotiate a bend, and hit a car in coming in the opposite direction. The claimant said that he crashed when he lost control in the debris.
Held: The judge had not correctly identified the various ways in which the claimant had pleaded his case that his accident occurred through his reaction to the emergency ahead of him. The evidence suggested that but for the accident he would have successfully have negotiated the bend. The appeal was allowed subject to a finding of 20% contributory negligence.

Judges:

Ward LJ, Lawrence Collins LJ, Toulson LJ

Citations:

[2007] EWCA Civ 1315

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedCommissioner of Police for the Metropolis v Reeves (Joint Administratix of The Estate of Martin Lynch, Deceased) HL 15-Jul-1999
The deceased was a prisoner known to be at risk of committing suicide. Whilst in police custody he hanged himself in his prison cell. The Commissioner accepted that he was in breach of his duty of care to the deceased, but not that that breach was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Road Traffic, Negligence

Updated: 24 April 2022; Ref: scu.262108

Gorringe v Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council: HL 1 Apr 2004

Statutory Duty Not Extended by Common Law

The claimant sought damages after a road accident. The driver came over the crest of a hill and hit a bus. The road was not marked with any warning as to the need to slow down.
Held: The claim failed. The duty could not be extended to include one which went beyond the original common law duty to maintain the surface of the road. The statutory duty to maintain the road did not create additional duties in negligence. Lord Scott said: ‘[A]n overriding imperative is that those who drive on public highways do so in a manner and at a speed that is safe having regard to such matters as the nature of the road, the weather conditions and the traffic conditions. Drivers are first and foremost themselves responsible for their own safety.’
Lord Steyn said: ‘the courts must not contribute to the creation of a society bent on litigation, which is premised on the illusion that for every misfortune there is a remedy’
Lord Hoffmann said: ‘Speaking for myself, I find it difficult to imagine a case in which a common law duty can be founded simply upon the failure (however irrational) to provide some benefit which a public authority has power (or a public law duty) to provide.’

Judges:

Steyn, Hoffmann, Scott, Rodger LL

Citations:

[2004] UKHL 15, Times 02-Apr-2004, [2004] 1 WLR 1057, [2004] RTR 27, [2004] 2 All ER 326

Links:

HL, Bailii

Statutes:

Highways Act 1980

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedX (Minors) v Bedfordshire County Council; M (A Minor) and Another v Newham London Borough Council; Etc HL 29-Jun-1995
Liability in Damages on Statute Breach to be Clear
Damages were to be awarded against a Local Authority for breach of statutory duty in a care case only if the statute was clear that damages were capable of being awarded. in the ordinary case a breach of statutory duty does not, by itself, give rise . .
CitedBarrett v London Borough of Enfield HL 17-Jun-1999
The claimant had spent his childhood in foster care, and now claimed damages against a local authority for decisions made and not made during that period. The judge’s decision to strike out the claim had been upheld by the Court of Appeal.
CitedStovin v Wise, Norfolk County Council (Third Party) HL 24-Jul-1996
Statutory Duty Does Not Create Common Law Duty
The mere existence of statutory power to remedy a defect cannot of itself create a duty of care to do so. A highway authority need not have a duty of care to highway users because of its duty to maintain the highway. The two stage test ‘involves . .
CitedRowling v Takaro Properties Ltd PC 30-Nov-1987
(New Zealand) The minister had been called upon to consent to the issue of shares to a foreign investor. The plaintiff said that the minister’s negligent refusal of consent had led to the collapse of the project and financial losses.
Held: On . .
Appeal fromGorringe v Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council CA 2-May-2002
The claimant sought damages, alleging that an accident occurred as a result of the defendant highway authority’s negligence in failing to mark the road properly. A ‘Slow’ sign had become faded and had not been maintained.
Held: The judge had . .
CitedPhelps v Hillingdon London Borough Council; Anderton v Clwyd County Council; Gower v Bromley London Borough Council; Jarvis v Hampshire County Council HL 28-Jul-2000
The plaintiffs each complained of negligent decisions in his or her education made by the defendant local authorities. In three of them the Court of Appeal had struck out the plaintiff’s claim and in only one had it been allowed to proceed.
CitedTomlinson v Congleton Borough Council and others HL 31-Jul-2003
The claimant dived into a lake, severely injuring himself. The council appealed liability, arguing that it owed him no duty of care under the Act since he was a trespasser. It had placed warning signs to deter swimmers.
Held: The council’s . .
CitedBurnside and Another v Emerson and Others CA 1968
The plaintiffs were injured in a road accident caused by flooding. They sued the executors of the deceased driver whose car spun out of control into the path of their own car, and also the highway authority, who had installed a proper system of . .
CitedGoodes v East Sussex County Council HL 16-Jun-2000
The claimant was driving along a road. He skidded on ice, crashed and was severely injured. He claimed damages saying that the Highway authority had failed to ‘maintain’ the road.
Held: The statutory duty on a highway authority to keep a road . .
CitedHaydon v Kent County Council CA 1978
Impacted snow and ice had built up on a steep, narrow, made-up footpath from Monday to Thursday during a short wintry spell. The plaintiff slipped and broke her ankle. The highway authority operated a system of priorities. Their resources were fully . .
CitedGoldman v Hargrave PC 13-Jun-1966
(Australia) In Western Australia, a red gum tree was struck by lightning and set on fire. The appellant had the tree cut down, but took no reasonable steps by spraying the fire with water to prevent the fire from spreading, believing that it would . .
CitedLavis v Kent County Council QBD 18-Feb-1992
The plaintiff had received serious injuries whilst riding his motor cycle at a road junction for which the defendants were responsible. He alleged that they were liable to him for failing to ensure that proper warning signs were placed at the . .
CitedLarner v Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council CA 20-Dec-2000
The duty on a local authority to promote road safety did not remove from them the discretion as to how that duty was to be implemented. A claim that the authority had failed to place certain signage, and that an accident had occurred which might not . .
CitedO’Rourke v Mayor etc of the London Borough of Camden HL 12-Jun-1997
The claimant had been released from prison and sought to be housed as a homeless person. He said that his imprisonment brought him within the category of having special need. He also claimed damages for the breach.
Held: The Act was intended . .
CitedCapital and Counties Plc and Another v Hampshire County Council; Etc CA 20-Mar-1997
Three cases were brought against fire services after what were said to be negligent responses to call outs. On one, the fire brigade was called to a fire at office premises in Hampshire. The fire triggered the operation of a heat-activated sprinkler . .
CitedGeddis v Proprietors of Bann Reservoir HL 18-Feb-1878
The owner of land injured by operations authorised by statute ‘suffers a private loss for the public benefit’, and in the absence of clear statutory authority is unable to claim: ‘It is now thoroughly well established that no action will lie for . .
CitedCommissioner of Police for the Metropolis v Reeves (Joint Administratix of The Estate of Martin Lynch, Deceased) HL 15-Jul-1999
The deceased was a prisoner known to be at risk of committing suicide. Whilst in police custody he hanged himself in his prison cell. The Commissioner accepted that he was in breach of his duty of care to the deceased, but not that that breach was . .
CitedSkilton v Epsom and Ewell Urban District Council CA 1937
A line of traffic studs had been placed in the centre of the highway. One of them had become loose. As a car passed over the loose stud it shot out and struck the plaintiff on her bicycle. She fell off and was injured. She sued the highway . .
CitedSedleigh-Denfield v O’Callaghan HL 24-Jun-1940
Occupier Responsible for Nuisance in adopting it
A trespasser laid a drain along a ditch on the defendant’s land. Later the defendants came to use the drain themselves. A grate was misplaced by them so that in a heavy rainstorm, it became clogged with leaves, and water flowed over into the . .
CitedEast Suffolk Rivers Catchment Board v Kent HL 1941
An exceptionally high spring tide caused many breaches of the banks of the River Deben, and extensive flooding, including the respondent’s farm. By section 6 of the 1930 Act, the appellants had a statutory power to maintain the flood defences, but . .
CitedDorset Yacht Co Ltd v Home Office HL 6-May-1970
A yacht was damaged by boys who had escaped from the supervision of prison officers in a nearby Borstal institution. The boat owners sued the Home Office alleging negligence by the prison officers.
Held: Any duty of a borstal officer to use . .
CitedLeta Almeda v Her Majesty’s Attorney General for Gibraltar PC 24-Nov-2003
PC (Gibraltar) . .
CitedAnns and Others v Merton London Borough Council HL 12-May-1977
The plaintiff bought her apartment, but discovered later that the foundations were defective. The local authority had supervised the compliance with Building Regulations whilst it was being built, but had failed to spot the fault. The authority . .
CitedSutherland Shire Council v Heyman 4-Jul-1985
(High Court of Australia) The court considered a possible extension of the law of negligence.
Brennan J said: ‘the law should develop novel categories of negligence incrementally and by analogy with established categories. ‘
Dean J said: . .
CitedMurray v Nicholls 1983
A car was driven without stopping out of a side street colliding with another car. One driver was killed and his passengers were injured. They sued the driver’s widow and Strathclyde Regional Council as roads authority. It was averred that, some . .

Cited by:

CitedFiona Thompson v Hampshire County Council CA 27-Jul-2004
The claimant fell into a ditch by a path on the highway in the dark. She appealed a finding of no liability on the highway authority.
Held: The authority’s responsibility was as to the surface structures of the road way and not as to the . .
CitedJane Marianne Sandhar, John Stuart Murray v Department of Transport, Environment and the Regions CA 5-Nov-2004
The claimant’s husband died when his car skidded on hoar frost. She claimed the respondent was liable under the Act and at common law for failing to keep it safe.
Held: The respondent had not assumed a general responsibility to all road users . .
CitedCarty v London Borough of Croydon CA 27-Jan-2005
The claimant sought damages in negligence from education officers employed by the respondent. He appealed refusal of his claim. A statement of special education needs had been made which he said did not address his learning difficulties. The . .
CitedCorr v IBC Vehicles Ltd CA 31-Mar-2006
The deceased had suffered a head injury whilst working for the defendant. In addition to severe physical consequences he suffered post-traumatic stress, became more and more depressed, and then committed suicide six years later. The claimant . .
CitedHM Customs and Excise v Barclays Bank Plc HL 21-Jun-2006
The claimant had served an asset freezing order on the bank in respect of one of its customers. The bank paid out on a cheque inadvertently as to the order. The Commissioners claimed against the bank in negligence. The bank denied any duty of care. . .
CitedDepartment for Transport, Environment and the Regions v Mott Macdonald Ltd and others CA 27-Jul-2006
Claims arose from accidents caused by standing water on roadway surfaces after drains had not been cleared by the defendants over a long period of time. The Department appealed a decision giving it responsibility under a breach of statutory duty . .
CitedNeil Martin Ltd v Revenue and Customs Commissioners 28-Sep-2006
The claimant sought damages from the revenue for their failure properly to process his claim for a sub-contractor’s certificate which had led to losses.
Held: The revenue owed no common law duty of care to the claimant and nor were damages . .
CitedRowley and others v Secretary of State for Department of Work and Pensions CA 19-Jun-2007
The claimants sought damages for alleged negligence of the defendant in the administration of the Child Support system.
Held: The defendant in administering the statutory system owed no direct duty of care to those affected: ‘a common law duty . .
CitedShine v Tower Hamlets CA 9-Jun-2006
The claimant a nine year old boy had attempted to leap frog a bollard. He was badly injured when it fell. The authority had identified that it was insecure some months earlier. The authority appealed a finding of negligence and breach of statutory . .
CitedK v Central and North West London Mental Health NHS Trust and Another QBD 30-May-2008
The claimant appealed against an order striking out his claim in negligence. He had leaped from a window in a suicide attempt. The accommodation was provided by the defendant whilst caring for him under the 1983 Act.
Held: The case should be . .
CitedMitchell and Another v Glasgow City Council HL 18-Feb-2009
(Scotland) The pursuers were the widow and daughter of a tenant of the respondent who had been violently killed by his neighbour. They said that the respondent, knowing of the neighbour’s violent behaviours had a duty of care to the deceased and . .
CitedConnor v Surrey County Council CA 18-Mar-2010
The claimant teacher said that she suffered personal injury from stress after the board of governors improperly failed to protect her from from false complaints. The Council now appealed against an award of substantial damages.
Held: The . .
CitedPoulton v Ministry of Justice CA 22-Apr-2010
The claimant was trustee in bankruptcy but the court failed to register the bankruptcy petition at the Land Registry as a pending action. The bankrupt was therefore able to sell her land, and the trustee did not recover the proceeds. The trustee . .
CitedAli v The City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council CA 17-Nov-2010
The claimant appealed against rejection of her claim for damages after slipping on a footpath maintainable by the defendant after an accumulation of mud and debris. The claim appeared to be the first under section 130, and the highway authority . .
CitedHome Office v Mohammed and Others CA 29-Mar-2011
The claimants sought damages saying that after a decision had been made that they should receive indefinite leave to remain in 2001 (latest), the leave was not issued until 2007 (earliest) thus causing them severe losses. The defendant now appealed . .
CitedMichael and Others v The Chief Constable of South Wales Police and Another SC 28-Jan-2015
The claimants asserted negligence in the defendant in failing to provide an adequate response to an emergency call, leading, they said to the death of their daughter at the hands of her violent partner. They claimed also under the 1998 Act. The . .
CitedDodson v Environment Agency QBD 28-Feb-2013
The claimant asserted that the steps taken by the defendant to encourage wildlife in the estuary had led to otters predating his fish farm stocks, and that the claimant had not been informed of this, in particular as to the construction of otter . .
CitedRobinson v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police SC 8-Feb-2018
Limits to Police Exemption from Liability
The claimant, an elderly lady was bowled over and injured when police were chasing a suspect through the streets. As they arrested him they fell over on top of her. She appealed against refusal of her claim in negligence.
Held: Her appeal . .
CitedPoole Borough Council v GN and Another SC 6-Jun-2019
This appeal is concerned with the liability of a local authority for what is alleged to have been a negligent failure to exercise its social services functions so as to protect children from harm caused by third parties. The principal question of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Local Government, Road Traffic

Leading Case

Updated: 24 April 2022; Ref: scu.195054

Phethean-Hubble v Coles: QBD 24 Feb 2011

The claimant had been very severely injured when knocked from his cycle by the defendant’s car. He had come out onto the roadway at night but without cycle lights, and into the path of the car. The claimant was not wearing a helmet.
Held: Smith v Finch was applied to say that a cyclist not wearing a helmet runs the risk of contributing to his injuries: ‘the literature establishes that cycle helmets are generally beneficial in head injury cases. It is clear that a properly designed helmet worn by a cyclist at speeds of up to 12mph who falls 1.5 metres and hits his head on the pavement is afforded a high level of protection . . the potential benefit of helmets is not limited simply to cases of mild injury but may include cases of severe head injury’ The claimant’s damages should be reduced by one third.

Judges:

Wilcox J

Citations:

[2011] EWHC 363 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedFroom v Butcher CA 21-Jul-1975
The court asked what reduction if any should be made to a plaintiff’s damages where injuries were caused not only by the defendant’s negligent driving but also by the failure of the plaintiff to wear a seat belt. It had been submitted that, since . .
CitedSmith v Finch QBD 22-Jan-2009
The claimant cyclist was severely injured in an accident when hit by a motorcyclist, the defendant. He was not wearing a cycle helmet, and the injuries were to his head. He was slowing down to turn right, and was hit a heavy glancing blow by the . .

Cited by:

Appeal fromPhethean-Hubble v Coles CA 21-Mar-2012
The claimant cyclist suffered serious injury in a collision with a car driven by the defendant. The defendant appealed against a finding that he was two thirds responsible. The case for the injured cyclist was that the motorist was going too fast. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Negligence, Road Traffic, Damages

Updated: 22 April 2022; Ref: scu.430055

Farah v Abdullahi and Others: QBD 20 Apr 2018

The claimant had been injured in a road accident. The driver of the vehicle was unknown, but the insurer was known. The defendant now applied for the claim to be struck out on the basis that it had been free to avoid the policy ab initio for non-disclosure.
Held: The order stood: ‘the principles set out in Cameron are engaged and that the claimant is prima facie entitled to proceed against the third defendant as an unnamed party. It seems to me that it would be both efficacious and consistent with the overriding objective to allow the claim to go forward in that way. The entitlement of a claimant to proceed against an unnamed driver should not depend on the section 151 liability of the insurer being incontrovertibly established. That would be to draw a somewhat arbitrary distinction between cases where the claimant’s rights rested on section 151 and cases where his rights rested on the Uninsured Drivers’ Agreement / Article 75 (or some combination of the two). It would be arbitrary because both routes offer a remedy of value and both form part of an overall scheme intended to meet the UK’s obligations under the Motor Insurance Directives. Furthermore, given the time limit in section 152(2) and given also the fact that the victim of a road accident cannot know if there are matters that might lead to the avoidance of the insurance covering the vehicle which injured him, at the point of issue and/or service of the Claim Form neither he nor the court can be confident that section 151 will ultimately be engaged.’

Citations:

[2018] EWHC 738 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Road Traffic

Updated: 13 April 2022; Ref: scu.609110

Wilkinson v Fitzgerald and Another: QBD 11 Jun 2009

The court considered the statutory liability of an insurer to satisfy a judgment obtained against a driver who was not insured by the policy. UK domestic legislation gives the insurer a right of recovery against an insured person who caused or permitted the use of the vehicle. The Claimant argued that this right of recovery is incompatible with his rights as a road accident victim under various EC/EU.

Judges:

Blair J

Citations:

[2009] EWHC 1297 (QB), [2009] 3 CMLR 33, [2009] PIQR P20, [2010] 1 All ER 198

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

European, Personal Injury, Road Traffic

Updated: 12 April 2022; Ref: scu.346902

Lord-Castle v Director of Public Prosecutions: QBD 23 Jan 2009

The defendant appealed by case stated from his conviction for using a motor vehicle fitted with a siren. When stopped various items suggesting that driver might be providing an ambulance service were found. The siren was not used.
Held: The test was: ‘is the vehicle concerned used (or primarily used) for conveying the sick, the injured or disabled? If so, it is ‘used for ambulance purposes’. Otherwise, it is not.’ The court had applied the wrong test, but the appeal failed. The defendant had not given evidence, and the court had been free to draw an adverse inference under section 35 of the 1996 Act.

Judges:

Scott Baker LJ, Maddison J

Citations:

[2009] EWHC 87 (QB), [2009] EWHC 87 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Statutes:

Road Vehicles (Construction and Use Regulations) 1986, Road Traffic Act 1988 42, Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 35

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedRegina v Aziz; Regina v Tosun; Regina v Yorganci HL 16-Jun-1995
The defendant (one of three) relied upon his part exculpatory statement made in interview and did not give evidence. The judge said that his good character was relevant as to his own propensity, and the character of the others was relevant to their . .
CitedDirector of Public Prosecutions v Hawkins 1996
That a motor vehicle was not, when stopped, carrying a patient, was not determinative of whether it was being used as an ambulance. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Road Traffic

Updated: 12 April 2022; Ref: scu.280152

Denny v Director of Public Prosecutions: QBD 1990

The appellant had been stopped, taken to a police station and required to provide two specimens of breath for analysis. After he provided the second, the device indicated that it was not functioning normally, so the officer could not say that he had been provided by the defendant with two specimens of breath which had been analysed reliably, if at all. He was then taken to another police station where he provided two further specimens of breath which revealed that the level of alcohol was in excess of the prescribed limit. He appealed on the ground that he could not be lawfully required to provide two further specimens of breath and should instead have been required to provide a sample of blood or urine.
Held: The appeal was dismissed. Since the material words in section 8(1)(a) were ‘to provide two specimens of breath for analysis’, there was no such provision of specimens unless the result of the motorist blowing properly into the device, and it working properly so as to receive and analyse the specimens and record the result, was the provision of two valid breath specimens. Accordingly, the officer was entitled to require the provision of two further specimens and was not limited to the alternative course of requiring the provision of blood or urine specimens.

Citations:

[1990] RTR 417

Statutes:

Road Traffic Act 1972 8(1)(a)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedHussain v the Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 19-Mar-2008
Appeal by case stated – conviction for failing to provide specimen of breath. Machine at one station had failed on two occasions – defendant taken to second station and re-tested. Whether third test request lawful.
Held: In completing the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Road Traffic

Updated: 12 April 2022; Ref: scu.267732

Morton v Wheeler: CA 31 Jan 1956

Sharp spikes by the side of a highway were said to be a nuisance. Lord Denning MR said: ‘As all lawyers know, the tort of public nuisance is a curious mixture. It covers a multitude of sins. We are concerned to-day with only one of them, namely, a danger in or adjoining a highway. This is different, I think, from an obstruction in the highway. If a man wrongfully obstructs a highway, or makes it less commodious for others (without making it dangerous) he is guilty of a public nuisance because he interferes with the right of the public to pass along it freely.’ and ‘Danger stands, however, on a different footing from obstruction.’

Judges:

Lord Denning MR

Citations:

1956 CA 33

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedDymond v Pearce CA 13-Jan-1972
A motorcyclist crashed into the rear of a lorry stationary on the carriageway. The plaintff said that the parking of the lorry was a nuisance, and that if it had not been so parked, there would have been no accident.
Held: The appeal failed. . .
ApprovedRider v Rider CA 1973
The plaintiff was a passenger in a car which her husband was driving and which collided with a van. The husband had been driving too fast. The edge of the tarmac on the road abutted grass verges at a lower level and the edge had been inadequately . .
CitedWalsh v The Council of The Borough of Kirklees QBD 5-Mar-2019
No demonstrable error of assessment – no appeal
The claimant cyclist appealed from refusal of damages after being thrown from her bike on hitting a pothole in the road. The court had found it unproven that the pothole was dangerous.
Held: The evidence had been difficult. The court noted . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Nuisance, Road Traffic

Updated: 12 April 2022; Ref: scu.265920

Director of Public Prosecutions v Potts: QBD 4 Dec 1988

Whether or not the condition of a vehicle is such that it is a danger to any person is a question of fact.

Judges:

Otton LJ and Astill LJ

Citations:

Unreported, 4 December 1988

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedVehicle and Operator Services Agency, Regina (on the Application of) v Henderson Admn 15-Dec-2004
The prosecutor appealed a decision of the magistrates not to convict a lorry driver. He had stopped after feeling vibration. At the service station he had taken off and replaced the wheel nuts by hand, and was awaiting service. The vehicle inspector . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Road Traffic

Updated: 12 April 2022; Ref: scu.226972

Director of Public Prosecutions v Parker: QBD 7 May 2004

The defendant had driven a two wheeled vehicle, but with a closed cockpit. The prosecutor appealed dismissal of the case against him for not having worn a safety helmet.
Held: The machine had enhanced safety features, but despite these, it remained a motor-cycle, and the law required him to wear a helmet.

Judges:

Rafferty J

Citations:

Times 29-Jun-2004

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Road Traffic

Updated: 12 April 2022; Ref: scu.198419

Joseph v Director of Public Prosecutions: QBD 24 Nov 2003

The defendant had given a specimen of breath over the minimum, but below 5omg, and accordingly he was to be allowed to give a specimen of blood or urine. The choice was the officers using a wide discretion. That discretion was still to be exercised reasonably. As a rastafarian, the defendant had refused to give a blood specimen.
Held: The officer had failed to use his discretion properly when refused the defendant the opportunity to give a urine specimen.

Judges:

Lord Woolf LCJ, Mackay J

Citations:

Times 02-Dec-2003, Gazette 15-Jan-2004

Statutes:

Road Traffic Act 1988 7

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedDirector of Public Prosecutions v Warren HL 9-Dec-1992
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 . .
CitedAssociated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd v Wednesbury Corporation CA 10-Nov-1947
Administrative Discretion to be Used Reasonably
The applicant challenged the manner of decision making as to the conditions which had been attached to its licence to open the cinema on Sundays. It had not been allowed to admit children under 15 years of age. The statute provided no appeal . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Road Traffic

Updated: 12 April 2022; Ref: scu.188610

Dymond v Pearce: CA 13 Jan 1972

A motorcyclist crashed into the rear of a lorry stationary on the carriageway. The plaintff said that the parking of the lorry was a nuisance, and that if it had not been so parked, there would have been no accident.
Held: The appeal failed. The accident was due wholly to the negligence of the motorcyclist. ‘sine qua non is not an all-sufficient basis for establishing liability.’ In criminal law at least nuisance must be actual as opposed to potential.

Judges:

Sachs LJ, Edmund Davies LJ, Stephenson LJ

Citations:

[1972] 1 All ER 1142, [1972] EWCA Civ 7, [1972] 2 WLR 633, [1972] 1 QB 496, [1972] RTR 169

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedMorton v Wheeler CA 31-Jan-1956
Sharp spikes by the side of a highway were said to be a nuisance. Lord Denning MR said: ‘As all lawyers know, the tort of public nuisance is a curious mixture. It covers a multitude of sins. We are concerned to-day with only one of them, namely, a . .
CitedMaitland v Raisbeck CA 1944
Lord Greene MR said: ‘Every person . . has a right to use the highway and, if something happens to him which in fact causes an obstruction to the highway but is in no way referable to his fault, it is quite impossible, in my view, to say that ipso . .
CitedFarrel v Mowlem 1954
The defendant had without justification laid a pipe across a pavement and the plaintiff tripped over it and was injured.
Held: The defendant was liable in nuisance. Devlin J said, as to the pipe: ‘No doubt it is a comparatively harmless sort . .
CitedRead v J Lyons and Co Ltd HL 1946
The plaintiff was employed by the Ministry of Defence, inspecting a weapons factory. A shell exploded injuring her. No negligence was alleged. The company worked as agent for the ministry.
Held: The respondents were not liable, since there had . .
CitedOverseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v Miller Steamship Co Pty (The Wagon Mound) (No 2) PC 25-May-1966
(New South Wales) When considering the need to take steps to avoid injury, the court looked to the nature of defendant’s activity. There was no social value or cost saving in this defendant’s activity. ‘In the present case there was no justification . .
CitedParish v Judd 1960
A lorry and a car it was towing stopped, obstructing the highway. The plaintiff crashed into them, and claimed that they constituted a nuisance. The vehicles had only just stopped, and the driver was checking that all was well with the car. The . .
CitedTrevetts v Lee CA 1955
Lord Evershed MR said: ‘The law as regards obstruction to highways is conveniently stated in a passage in Salmond on Torts, 13th edition: ‘A nuisance to a highway consists either in obstructing it or in rendering it dangerous’. Then a numbed of . .
CitedMorton v Weaver CA 31-Jan-1956
The court distinguished between obstructions of a highway and dangers created on it. Lord Denning MR asked: ‘How are we to determine whether a state of affairs in or near a highway is a danger?’ and answered ‘This depends, I think, on whether injury . .

Cited by:

CitedRouse v Squires CA 22-Mar-1973
. .
CitedHoughton v Stannard QBD 29-Oct-2003
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Road Traffic, Nuisance

Updated: 12 April 2022; Ref: scu.188834

Mills v Cooper: QBD 1967

Two sets of criminal proceedings were brought against the defendant for offences under section 127 of the Highways Act 1959 namely that of being a gypsy and, without lawful excuse, camping on a highway. The first proceedings were brought in respect of 22nd December 1965. Those proceedings were dismissed in February 1966 on the ground that the defendant was not a gypsy on that date, being not of the Romany race. Ten weeks later, in the second proceedings, a similar allegation was made in respect of 13th March 1966. The defendant argued that there was an issue estoppel as to his status; he was not a gypsy. The court was asked as to the meaning of the word ‘gypsy’ in the 1959 Act, which made it an offence for a gypsy to pitch a booth or to camp on a highway.
Held: There was no issue estoppel. Once it was recognised that being a gypsy was not an unalterable status but depended on the way of life which the person was leading at a particular time, it was clear that the incorrectness of the assertion as to the defendant’s status made in the first proceedings was not inconsistent with the correctness of the same assertion made in the second proceedings. The word ‘gypsy’ could not bear the dictionary meaning of a member of the Romany race, but should be given its colloquial or popular meaning of a person leading a nomadic life with no, or no fixed employment and with no fixed abode. ‘Looked at in that way, a man might well not be a gipsy on one date and yet be one on a later date’ A gipsy is a person without fixed abode who leads a nomadic life, dwelling in tents or other shelters, or in caravans or other vehicles. If that meaning is adopted, it follows that being a gipsy is not an unalterable status. It cannot be said, ‘once a gipsy always a gipsy’. By changing his way of life a modern Borrow may be a gipsy at one time and not a gipsy at another.
Magistrates, like any court, have a right in their discretion to decline to hear proceedings on the ground that they were oppressive and an abuse of the process of the court.
Lord Diplock said: ‘[The] doctrine [of estoppel] . . so far as it affects civil proceedings, may be stated thus: a party to civil proceedings is not entitled to make, as against the other party, an assertion, whether of fact or of the legal consequences of facts, the correctness of which is an essential element in his cause of action or defence . . in previous civil proceedings between the same parties or their predecessors in title and was found by a court of competent jurisdiction in such civil proceedings to be incorrect.’

Judges:

Diplock LJ, Lord Parker CJ, Ashworth J

Citations:

[1967] 2 QB 459

Statutes:

Highways Act 1959 127

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedWrexham County Borough v The National Assembly of Wales, Michael Berry, Florence Berry CA 19-Jun-2003
A traditional gypsy family had settled because of ill health, and sought to establish a caravan site. The authority claimed they were no longer to be treated as Gypsy and having the entitlement under the Act.
Held: The Act defined ‘Gypsies’ as . .
AppliedArnold v National Westminster Bank Plc HL 1991
Tenants invited the court to construe the terms of a rent review provision in the sub-underlease under which they held premises. The provision had been construed in a sense adverse to them in earlier proceedings before Walton J, but they had been . .
CitedCarphone Warehouse UK Ltd v Cyrus Malekout CA 14-Jun-2006
The tenant had a Rent Act tenancy. The landlord failed to repair the premises, and he was unable to occupy them. The present appellant landlord took an assignment of the freehold, and sought possession for arrears of rent. The first proceedings were . .
CitedRegina v Horseferry Road Magistrates’ Court, ex Parte Bennett (No 1) HL 24-Jun-1993
The defendant had been brought to the UK in a manner which was in breach of extradition law. He had, in effect, been kidnapped by the authorities.
Held: The High Court may look at how an accused person was brought within the jurisdiction when . .
CitedLevey, Regina v CACD 27-Jul-2006
The defendant appealed against his conviction of manslaughter of his baby son. He said that a family court had previously investigated the same allegations and had explicitly found itself unable to say which of himself and the mother were . .
CitedRegina v Belmarsh Magistrates’ Court ex parte Fiona Watts Admn 8-Feb-1999
The defendant sought to have dismissed as an abuse of proces charges against her that as an officer of Customs and Excise prosecuting the now private prosecutor, she had committed various offences.
Held: The magistrate was vested with . .
CitedSpecialist Group International Ltd v Deakin and Another CA 23-May-2001
Law upon res judicata – action estoppel and issue estoppel and the underlying policy interest whereby there is finality in litigation and litigants are not vexed twice on the same matter.
(May LJ) ‘the authorities taken as a whole tend to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Road Traffic, Criminal Practice

Updated: 12 April 2022; Ref: scu.184233

Director of Public Prosecutions v Spicer: Admn 13 Mar 1997

The defendant had successfully argued no case to answer, on a charge of driving without due care. The prosecutor appealed by way of case stated. From the detailed notes available to the court, it was clear that there was evidence before them to put the defendant to an answer. Case remitted.

Citations:

[1997] EWHC Admin 259

Statutes:

Road Traffic Act 1988 3

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedRegina v Galbraith CCA 1981
Rejection of Submission of No Case to Answer
The defendant had faced a charge of affray. The court having rejected his submission of having no case to answer, he had made an exculpatory statement from the dock. He appealed against his conviction.
Held: Lord Lane LCJ said: ‘How then . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Road Traffic

Updated: 12 April 2022; Ref: scu.137204

Firma Stadtereinigung K. Nehlsen KG v Freie Hansestadt Bremen: ECJ 6 Dec 1979

Transport – common policy – social provisions – regulation no 543/69 of the council – material scope – vehicles of public authorities – exclusion – vehicles of a private undertaking used to perform a public service – inclusion (regulation no 543/69 of the council, art. 4 (4), as amended by regulation no 2827/77) Pursuant to article 4 (4) of regulation no 543/69 of the council on the har- monization of certain social legis- lation relating to road transport, as amended by regulation no 2827/77, that regulation does not apply to carriage by ‘.. Vehicles which are used by other public authorities for public services. ‘ That expression must be understood as covering only vehicles which are owned by or under the control of the public authority and does not extend to vehicles belonging to a private undertaking and used by the latter to perform a public service or a service in the public interest which it has undertaken to provide under a contract governed by private law.

Citations:

C-47/79, [1979] ECR 3639

Cited by:

CitedVehicle Inspectorate v Bruce Cook Road Planing Ltd and Another HL 8-Jul-1999
The transport of motorway maintenance vehicles and plant to and from sites on the back of a low loader is not sufficiently closely connected with the use of such machines on the motorways, to attract exemption as for such use from the general . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Road Traffic

Updated: 10 April 2022; Ref: scu.132841

Wawrzynczyk v Chief Constable of Staffordshire Constabulary: QBD 28 Feb 2000

A motorist was convicted of speeding. On the stretch of road subject to the temporary limit an additional part had been included falsely representing the correct ends of the limited stretch. Nevertheless, the motorist was accused of speeding within the area subject to the restriction.
Held: Any misleading element in the signage did not affect that issue, and he was properly convicted. Where a temporary speed limit is in force on a stretch of road under an order made under the section 14, the order is not invalidated by speed restriction signs so placed as to suggest that the order applied to a longer stretch of road than was in fact the case. The offence of ‘exceeding the speed limit’ is not an offence requiring a mental element. The purpose of section 85 is that ‘adequate guidance be given to motorists’.

Judges:

Schiemann LJ and Astill J

Citations:

Times 16-Mar-2000, Gazette 23-Mar-2000, CO/4116/99

Statutes:

Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 14

Cited by:

CitedCoombes v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 20-Dec-2006
The defendant appealed against his conviction for speeding. The speed camera was placed just after the 30mph limit was imposed, and the signs were obscured by foliage.
Held: There was no case law direct on the point. The appeal was allowed. It . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Road Traffic

Updated: 10 April 2022; Ref: scu.90338

Regina v Pydar Justices Ex Parte Foster: QBD 23 May 1995

There was a case to answer on an OPL charge despite the computer readout not being handed to Justices. It was in evidence. Evidence referred to but not challenged by the defendant can be relied upon by Justices in making their decision. The court commented on a suggestion that a defending advocate was entitled to ‘keep his powder dry’: ‘Mr Burkett [who was the applicant] submitted that the solicitor concerned was entitled to sit quiet and not alert the justices to the error the defendant claims existed on the form, but make a submission about it to them later at a time of his choosing. I profoundly disagree with this thoroughly bad submission. Without any doubt whatsoever, it is the duty of a defending advocate properly to lay the ground for a submission, either by cross-examination or, if appropriate, by calling evidence.’

Judges:

Curtis J

Citations:

Times 23-May-1995, Ind Summary 12-Jun-1995, [1995] 160 JP 87

Cited by:

CitedChristopher James Jolly v Director of Public Prosections Admn 31-Mar-2000
At trial in the magistrates court, the prosecution had failed to bring evidence that the computer used to analyse the defendant’s breath alcohol was in proper working condition. The defendant submitted no case to answer, and the magistrates allowed . .
CitedAntonio Leeson v Haringey Justices and Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 26-Jul-1999
The prosecutor on a charge of driving with excess alcohol had failed to adduce evidence as to the calibration of the intoximeter. The magistrates allowed him to re-open his case. The defendant appealed.
Held: The appeal was dismissed: ‘If the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Road Traffic, Criminal Practice, Magistrates

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.87578

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

Regina v Swansea City and Council, Ex Parte Davies: QBD 7 Jul 2000

A hackney council vehicle licence holder had sufficient locus standi as a person aggrieved to appeal against a condition sought to be imposed by the local authority on the licensing of private hire vehicle licenses. Accordingly the Magistrates should hear his complaint and objection. The statute was not narrowly drafted so as to exclude the applicant, although it was not limitless.

Citations:

Times 07-Jul-2000

Statutes:

Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976 48

Licensing, Road Traffic, Local Government

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.85579

Regina v Wiggins: CACD 23 Jun 2000

The court should not normally order that a passenger who had been convicted of aggravated taking without consent should also be subject to a extended driving test after the conclusion of the ban in the same way that a driver might.

Citations:

Times 23-Jun-2000

Statutes:

Theft Act 1968

Criminal Sentencing, Road Traffic

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.85613

Regina v Kensington and Chelsea London Borough Council, Ex Parte Eminian: QBD 17 Aug 2000

When a householder applied for leave to construct a vehicular crossing over a footway to the carriageway, the highway authority was entitled to consider the effect such a way would have on the controlled parking zone, and could go beyond the elements listed in the section. Here the grant of the right would have reduced the number of parking spaces available within the zone, and this was enough reason to refuse consent.

Citations:

Times 17-Aug-2000

Statutes:

Highways Act 1980 184(1)

Planning, Road Traffic

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.85342

Lavis v Kent County Council: QBD 18 Feb 1992

The plaintiff had received serious injuries whilst riding his motor cycle at a road junction for which the defendants were responsible. He alleged that they were liable to him for failing to ensure that proper warning signs were placed at the approach to the junction. The defendants were empowered to place such signs, but not under a duty to do so. They applied to strike out the plaintiff’s claim as disclosing no cause of action.
Held: A Local Authority had a discretion not to erect a particular road sign, but the decision was to be made according to the standards of a competent road engineer. ‘In my judgment it is perfectly clear that the duty imposed is not capable of covering the erection of traffic signs, and nothing more need be said about that particular provision’.

Citations:

Times 24-Nov-1994, (1992) 90 LGR 416, [1993] CLY 2949

Cited by:

AppliedGorringe v Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council CA 2-May-2002
The claimant sought damages, alleging that an accident occurred as a result of the defendant highway authority’s negligence in failing to mark the road properly. A ‘Slow’ sign had become faded and had not been maintained.
Held: The judge had . .
CitedWalker v Northumberland County Council QBD 16-Nov-1994
The plaintiff was a manager within the social services department. He suffered a mental breakdown in 1986, and had four months off work. His employers had refused to provide the increased support he requested. He had returned to work, but again, did . .
CitedGorringe v Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council HL 1-Apr-2004
Statutory Duty Not Extended by Common Law
The claimant sought damages after a road accident. The driver came over the crest of a hill and hit a bus. The road was not marked with any warning as to the need to slow down.
Held: The claim failed. The duty could not be extended to include . .
CitedHertfordshire Police v Van Colle; Smith v Chief Constable of Sussex Police HL 30-Jul-2008
Police Obligations to Witnesses is Limited
A prosecution witness was murdered by the accused shortly before his trial. The parents of the deceased alleged that the failure of the police to protect their son was a breach of article 2.
Held: The House was asked ‘If the police are alerted . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Negligence, Local Government, Road Traffic

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.82958

Kingston Upon Hull City Council v Wilson: QBD 29 Jun 1995

The grant to an individual of a hackney licence in one local authority, does not stop the grant of a similar licence elsewhere. Though the court applied the ABC case, Buxton J rejected an argument that a vehicle was not a private hire vehicle for the purposes of section 46(1)(b) as it was a ‘hackney carriage’ and thus fell outside the definition of ‘private hire vehicle’ in section 80: ‘That amounts to saying that once the vehicle is licensed anywhere as a hackney carriage, that precludes the application, in respect of that vehicle, of any part of Section 46 of this act anywhere else in this country. Thus, if Mr. Wilson had driven his vehicle in other respects not in conformity with Section 46 in Truro or Newcastle Upon Tyne, the fact that it had been licensed in Beverley as a hackney carriage would preclude the application, by any local authority, of section 46(2) . . for my part, I cannot accept that this Act intends it to be the case that in every case where a hackney carriage vehicle exists it follows thereafter that the vehicle so licensed cannot be susceptible to the rules applying to private hire vehicles . . it cannot, in my view, be the case that simply to licence a vehicle as a hackney carriage thereby makes that vehicle a hackney carriage for all time, even if it is functioning as a private hire vehicle. In my judgment, therefore, it is not enough that a hackney carriage licence exists to establish that this vehicle was a hackney carriage as that term is used in the definition of a ‘private hire vehicle’ in section 80 of the 1976 Act.’

Judges:

Buxton J

Citations:

Times 25-Jul-1995, CO 1249-95

Statutes:

Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976

Citing:

AppliedBritain v ABC Cabs (Camberley) Ltd QBD 1981
A hackney carriage had been booked, in the district where it was licensed, to pick up a fare in another district. The prosecutor said that when and where the fare was picked up the hackney carriage had no relevant private hire licence and no . .

Cited by:

CitedNewcastle City Council, Regina (on the Application of) v Berwick-Upon-Tweed Borough Council and others Admn 5-Nov-2008
The applicant council complained that the respondent council was issuing a disproportionately high number of taxi licences, believing that it should only refuse a licence where the driver appeared to be unfit.
Held: The purpose of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Licensing, Road Traffic

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.82795

Jolley v Director of Public Prosecutions: QBD 5 May 2000

In a trial on a charge of driving with excess alcohol, the prosecutor failed to bring evidence that the computer involved had been working correctly. This was pointed out by the defendant at the close of his case, and the magistrate allowed the prosecutor to bring that evidence. The appeal failed. The court now has a clear general discretion to admit evidence after a case has been closed but before retiring. When using that discretion the justices must test what prejudice might be caused, but this is no longer an exceptional cases only discretion.

Citations:

Gazette 05-May-2000

Criminal Evidence, Road Traffic, Magistrates

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.82573

Jones v Director of Public Prosecutions: QBD 20 Oct 2000

Where magistrates considered an offence for which a driving ban was discretionary, they were entitled at that stage to take account of the driving record, even though they knew they would have to take that same record into account when considering a totting up ban. There was no double jeopardy, since the two systems considered different aspects of the offence, the speed driven on this occasion, and the repetition creating a pattern of behaviour. The two systems were not mutually exclusive, or alternatives.

Citations:

Gazette 02-Nov-2000, Times 20-Oct-2000

Statutes:

Road Traffic Act 1972

Cited by:

CitedFlegg v Justices of the Peace for the New Forest Local Justice Area Sitting at Lyndhurst Admn 21-Feb-2006
The defendant sought judicial review of the refusal by the magistrates to state a case. He was convicted for failing to identify the driver of a motor cycle of which he was a registered keeper which had been caught by a speed camera. Either of two . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Sentencing, Road Traffic

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.82599

Morton v Weaver: CA 31 Jan 1956

The court distinguished between obstructions of a highway and dangers created on it. Lord Denning MR asked: ‘How are we to determine whether a state of affairs in or near a highway is a danger?’ and answered ‘This depends, I think, on whether injury may reasonably be foreseen. If you take all the cases in the book, you will – find that if the state of affairs is such that injury may reasonably be anticipated by persons using the highway it is a public nuisance …. But if the possibility of injury is so remote that the reasonable man would dismiss it out of hand, saying ‘Of course, it is possible, but not in the least probable’, then it is not a danger.’
He went on to say: ‘Inasmuch as the test of danger is what may reasonably be foreseen, it is apparent that cases of public nuisance . . have an affinity with negligence.’ Nevertheless: ‘There is a real distinction between negligence and nuisance. In an action for private damage arising out of a public nuisance, the court does not look at the conduct of the defendant and ask whether he was negligent. It looks at the actual state of affairs as it exists in or adjoining the highway, without regard to the merits or demerits of the defendant. If the state of affairs is such as to be a danger to persons using the highway . . it is a public nuisance. Once it is held to be a danger, the person who created it is liable unless he can show sufficient justification or excuse.’

Judges:

Lord Denning MR

Citations:

Unreported, 31/01/1956

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedDymond v Pearce CA 13-Jan-1972
A motorcyclist crashed into the rear of a lorry stationary on the carriageway. The plaintff said that the parking of the lorry was a nuisance, and that if it had not been so parked, there would have been no accident.
Held: The appeal failed. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Nuisance, Road Traffic

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.265962

Bray v Palmer: CA 1953

The plaintiff was driving his motorcycle. The defendant drove a motor car on the same road in the opposite direction. Each said that they were driving at acceptable speed when the two vehicles collided in the centre of the road. The trial judge dismissed the plaintiff’s claim and the defendant’s counterclaim for he could not determine who was negligent.
Held: Lord Evershed MR said: ‘I can borrow from the observations of my two brethren to put the point quite briefly. My Brother Morris observed, quoting from one of the last passages I have read: ‘The judge is saying ‘Both stories are wildly improbable and yet one of them happened.’ If they are so wildly improbable, I am not satisfied that the judge was justified in excluding the possibility of the truth lying somewhere between the two, so that perhaps each would be less wildly improbable, or at least in excluding the possibility (which it seems to me was open) of both being wrong.’ I now come to the observation by my Brother Jenkins: ‘Unless that was so, the judge seems to me to have stated the case and his conclusions in such a way that one party or the other or both must have suffered an injustice.’ Whether that is so or not is perhaps another matter, but, if the result appears to be so, then, as it seems to me, it is not satisfactory to leave it thus, but this court ought to order a new trial.
I need not say that it is most regrettable that such a course should be followed because, after all, this accident happened more than two years ago and the recollections of the witnesses will have been either blurred or perhaps, by over-thinking, crystallised somewhat sharply in the interval. But still I have come to the conclusion, with the utmost respect for the judge and acknowledging his difficulty and his experience, that to have stated the matter as he did does involve either a real flaw, or something that looks so like it that it would not be right to leave the matter thus. I think, therefore, that this appeal must be allowed and a new trial ordered.’

Judges:

Lord Evershed MR

Citations:

[1953] 1 WLR 1455

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedMorris v London Iron and Steel Co Ltd CA 1987
In exceptional cases, a judge conscientiously seeking to decide the issues between the parties might have to conclude ‘I just do not know’. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Road Traffic

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.187186

Commission v Germany -C-668/16: ECJ 11 Apr 2018

Approximation of Laws – Opinion – Failure of a Member State to fulfill obligations – Directive 2007/46 / EC – Liability of national authorities – Measures relating to the conformity of vehicles with technical requirements – Balancing the conformity gap and safety risks – Obligations of the manufacturer – Penalties – Directive 2006/40 / EC – Limit on emissions from air-conditioning systems of motor vehicles – Circumvention of the Directive

Citations:

ECLI:EU:C:2018:230, [2018] EUECJ C-668/16 – O

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 2007/46/EC

Jurisdiction:

European

Road Traffic, Environment

Updated: 07 April 2022; Ref: scu.608633

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: scu.248832

Seddon v The Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA): QBD 21 Feb 2018

Preliminary issue of law, as to whether the Defendant, the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA), an executive agency of the Department for Transport, owes a duty of care to the Claimant, Mr Seddon, as to its listing as having the benefit of the ‘historic car’ taxation clssification.

Judges:

Justine Thornton QC

Citations:

[2018] EWHC 312 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Road Traffic

Updated: 05 April 2022; Ref: scu.605805

Miller v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 15 Feb 2018

Appeal by way of case stated from a pre-trial ruling of the Black Country Magistrates’ Court in respect of an information preferred against the Appellant for failing to provide a specimen of blood in breach of section 7 of the 1988 Act, and not to exercise its discretion under section 78 of the 1984 Act to exclude evidence of the drug drive procedure at Oldbury Police Station that led to the charge being made.

Judges:

Hickinbottom LJ, Dove J

Citations:

[2018] EWHC 262 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Road Traffic Act 1988 7, Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 78

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Road Traffic

Updated: 05 April 2022; Ref: scu.605608

Gray v The Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis: CA 1 Dec 2016

Police had seized the claimant’s car on the basis that it was not insured. The claimant now appealed against rejection of her claim for damages, saying that it had in fact been insured.

Judges:

MacFarlane, Davis LJJ

Citations:

[2016] EWCA Civ 1360

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Road Traffic Act 1988

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Police, Road Traffic

Updated: 05 April 2022; Ref: scu.592415

Director of Public Prosecutions v Hay: QBD 13 Jun 2005

The driver was unconscious following an accident. The police attended the accident. He was acquitted of later failing to report the accident to the police. The prosecutor appealed. The car had crashed as the police pursued it. No notice had been served on him to produce his documents, and he had argued also that he could not be convicted of driving without a licence or insurance without a request having been made.
Held: The prosecutor’s appeal succeeded. The responsibility was on the driver to prove his entitlement to drive, and it was not a pre-condition of the offence that the documents had been requested. Similarly a driver involved in an accident had placed on him a duty to report it without being asked.

Citations:

Times 13-Jul-2005

Statutes:

Road Traffic Act 1988 8177

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedJohn v Humphreys 1955
It was for a defendant driver positively to establish that he had driven in accordance with a driving licence and with an appropriate policy of insurance. . .
CitedDirector of Public Prosections v Kayaz 1999
The onus was on the driver of a vehicle to prove that he had a valid driving licence and insurance. . .
CitedPeek v Towler 1945
A driver of a vehicle who had been involved in an accident, remained under a duty to report the accident and to provide his particulars whether or not he had been requested to do so: ‘It would be a remarkable state of affairs if . . The obligations . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Road Traffic

Updated: 05 April 2022; Ref: scu.228583

Director of Public Prosecutions v Camp: Admn 15 Dec 2017

The court was asked whether, at least in the particular circumstances of the case, self-induced intoxication could properly amount to a ‘reasonable excuse’ for failing to provide a specimen of breath for analysis, for the purposes of an alleged offence under section 7(6) of the 1988 Act.
Held: In these particular xircumstances, no.

Judges:

Lindblom LJ, Edis J

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 3119 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Road Traffic Act 1988 7(8)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Road Traffic, Crime

Updated: 03 April 2022; Ref: scu.602583

Rostron v Guildford Borough Council: Admn 5 Dec 2017

Claim for judicial review of the decision of Guildford Borough Council to fix for 2016-2017 the maximum fares that may be charged for the hire of hackney carriages within the Borough.

Judges:

John Howell QC

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 3141 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Road Traffic, Local Government

Updated: 02 April 2022; Ref: scu.601443

Select Car Rentals (North West) Ltd v Esure Services Ltd: QBD 19 Jun 2017

The court considered the extent to which credit hire companies are potentially vulnerable to adverse costs orders in litigation to which they are not a party in the context of the settlement of road traffic accidents.

Judges:

Turner J

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 1434 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Costs, Road Traffic

Updated: 28 March 2022; Ref: scu.588190

Gordon v Thorpe: QBD 1986

The defendant provided two specimens of breath through an intoximeter 3000. Though the machine appeared to be working otherwise properly, the two readings were wider apart than usual.
Held: Each reading was still in excess of the maximum, and expert evidence was to the effect that the blood alcohol level exceeded the maximum. The prosecutor’s appeal succeeded.

Citations:

[1986] RTR 358

Statutes:

Road Traffic Act 1972 6(1) 8(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedHussain v the Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 19-Mar-2008
Appeal by case stated – conviction for failing to provide specimen of breath. Machine at one station had failed on two occasions – defendant taken to second station and re-tested. Whether third test request lawful.
Held: In completing the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Road Traffic

Updated: 28 March 2022; Ref: scu.267733

Lietuvos Respublikos Transporto priemoniu draudiku biuras v Gintaras Dockevicius, Jurgita Dockeviciene: ECJ 15 Jun 2017

ECJ (Insurance Against Civil Liability In Respect of Motor Vehicles : Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Insurance against civil liability in respect of motor vehicles – Accident occurring in 2006 between vehicles normally based in different Member States – Internal Regulations of the Council of Bureaux of national insurers of the Member States – Lack of jurisdiction of the Court – Directive 2009/103/EC – Not applicable ratione temporis – Directives 72/166/EEC, 84/5/EEC and 2000/26/EC – Not applicable ratione materiae – Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Inapplicability – Failure to implement EU law

Citations:

ECLI:EU:C:2017:463, [2017] EUECJ C-587/15

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Road Traffic, Human Rights

Updated: 27 March 2022; Ref: scu.588285

U C-420/15: ECJ 31 May 2017

(Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Article 45 TFEU – Freedom of movement for workers – Obligation to register a vehicle owned by a person resident in Belgium and intended for use in Italy

Citations:

C-420/15, [2017] EUECJ C-420/15, ECLI:EU:C:2017:408

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Road Traffic, Employment

Updated: 26 March 2022; Ref: scu.584353

Oldham Borough Council v Sajjad: Admn 19 Dec 2016

The appeal is brought by the appellant against the decision of the Justices that the respondent was not guilty of the offence of using a motor vehicle on a road without there being in force a valid policy of insurance, contrary to section 143 of the Road Traffic Act 1988.

Judges:

McCombe LJ, Kerr J

Citations:

[2016] EWHC 3597 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Road Traffic Act 1988 143

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Road Traffic

Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581948

Elson v Stilgoe: CA 30 Mar 2017

Appeal from dismissal of claim for personal injuries in road traffic accident.
Held: The appeal failed: ‘the effect of the judge’s findings is that the claimant was not on the defendant’s side of the road for any length time sufficient for him to be observed by the defendant in a way which required him to take some evasive action. The judge’s findings present a picture of a defendant driving properly, confronted at the last moment by a claimant who had made a decision to veer into his path without good reason for doing so. The clear implication of findings made by the judge was that in the circumstances there was no reasonable ground for asserting that the driver should have taken account of the possibility of a sudden veering into his path without good reason by the claimant. The judge’s conclusions appear to me to show that the sole cause of the accident was the claimant’s actions rather than any action or inaction of the defendant.’

Citations:

[2017] EWCA Civ 193

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Negligence, Road Traffic

Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581337

Regina v Gosney: CA 1971

The defendant was driving on an unfamiliar side road and met a main road. She turned right into oncoming traffic. She was driving in the wrong direction on the carriageway. She was not allowed at trial, to adduce evidence that there was no signage to indicate that she was obliged to turn left, and that the road was unfamiliar to her.
Held: The offence of dangerous driving had two requirements. First that, objectively speaking, the driving was dangerous, and second, that the defendant was in some way at fault. The offence of dangerous driving is not an absolute offence. The court should have admitted her evidence and therefore the appeal succeeded.
‘Fault’ does not necessarily involve deliberate misconduct or recklessness, or an intention to drive in a manner inconsistent with proper standards of driving; nor does it necessarily involve moral blame. Fault involved failure that is a falling below the standard of care or skill of a competent and experienced driver. Fault in this sense even though it is slight, or is a momentary lapse will be sufficient, if, if looked at sensibly, it is a cause of the dangerous situation although not necessarily the sole cause. Fault will be sufficiently proved by inference from the facts of the situation, but an accused is not precluded from avoiding that inference by proving some special fact relevant to the question of fault.
The Court overruled earlier cases suggesting that dangerous driving is an absolute offence.

Judges:

Megaw LJ

Citations:

[1971] 3 All ER 220, [1971] 2 QB 674, [1971] 3 WLR 343, 135 JP 529, 115 Sol Jo 608, 55 Cr App Rep 501, [1971] RTR 321

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime, Road Traffic

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.655418

Gibson v Dalton: CA 1980

The requirement to notify a defendant of the possibility of a prosecution is to allow him to preserve any necessary evidence.

Judges:

Donaldson LJ

Citations:

[1980] RTR 410

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedCurrie, 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Road Traffic

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.251523

Ramwade Ltd v W J Emson and Co Ltd: CA 1987

The plaintiffs had been obliged to hire vehicles to perform the work carried out by their skip lorry which had been damaged beyond repair in a road accident. Their insurance brokers had, contrary to instructions, failed to procure a comprehensive insurance policy, and the claimants could not afford to replace it by buying another skip lorry.
Held: The court rejected the plaintiffs’ argument that the damage consisting in the hire of the vehicles flowed from the defendants’ failure to provide them with a comprehensive insurance policy. One of the reasons which he gave for reaching this conclusion was that it flowed from the impecuniosity of the plaintiffs which rendered them unable to afford a substitute vehicle, adding that ‘if that is the true cause the hire charges are irrecoverable on the principles laid down in The Liesbosch.’

Judges:

Parker LJ

Citations:

[1987] RTR 72

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

FollowedLiesbosch Dredger (Owners of) v Owners of SS Edison, The Liesbosch HL 28-Feb-1933
The ship Edison fouled the moorings of the Liesbosch resulting in the total loss of the dredger when it sank. It had been engaged on work in the harbour under contract with the harbour board. All the owners’ liquid resources were engaged in the . .

Cited by:

CitedLagden v O’Connor HL 4-Dec-2003
The parties had been involved in a road traffic accident. The defendant drove into the claimant’s parked car. The claimant was unable to afford to hire a car pending repairs being completed, and arranged to hire a car on credit. He now sought . .
CitedAlcoa Minerals of Jamaica Inc v Herbert Broderick PC 20-Mar-2000
(Jamaica) Damage had been caused to the claimant’s property, but, because of his lack of funds, he was dependent upon the receipt of the damages to carry out the works of repair necessary. By the time the matter came to trial, inflation meant that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Road Traffic, Damages

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.188646

Regina v Stacey: CA 1982

The defendant had been arrested for driving whilst unfit through drink. He was warned three hours later that he might be prosecuted for reckless driving. In fact he was not charged with any offence relating to drink. When tried for reckless driving he argued no case to answer because he had not been warned ‘at the time the offence was committed’ within the meaning of the section.
Held: The Court applied Bolkis. The decision was one for the judge. As he had arrived at the only appropriate answer on the facts the appeal was dismissed. Woolf J said that there was no authority on all fours but added: ‘. . it does appear to this court that the question is one which is much more suited to a decision by the judge than by a jury. It would be very unsatisfactory if one were to get a situation where one jury would come to one conclusion and another jury would come to another conclusion when exactly the same direction in law was given to them. It is therefore some comfort to find that whereas this point has not been considered on S179(4) . . ..(it) was in Rex v Bolkis [1932] 24 Cr App R 19 . . This court, in so far as the decision deals with the proper interpretation of S179(4) is bound by the decision in Rex v Bolkis. Quite clearly, if the court came to the conclusion that the word ‘court’ in subsection 4 referred to the judge, then that is a very real indication as to the proper interpretation of subsection (2).
The position is that in view of the decision in Rex v Bolkis . . . this court must take the view that the word ‘court’ in subsection (4) refers to the judge. Accordingly, when an issue under subsection (4) is raised before the court, the judge will be the person who determines the issue. It would lead to absurd results if a judge had to determine that issue but a jury had to determine an issue under subsection (2). Quite clearly, under subsection (4) the court is going to determine questions of fact as well as of law, and if the court, in the form of the judge has to determine the facts on subsection (4), it is only sensible and desirable that the judge should determine an issue under subsection (2).’

Judges:

Woolf J

Citations:

[1982] RTR 20

Statutes:

Road Traffic Act 1972 179(2)(a)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedRex v Bolkis CCA 1932
The defendant complained that a jury had not been asked a question of fact, namely whether his name and address could not be discovered withut due diligence. The section had a proviso that failure to comply with the section was not a bar to . .

Cited by:

CitedCurrie, 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Road Traffic

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.251522

Regina v Forest of Dean Justices ex parte Farley: CACD 1990

The prosecutor had charged the defendant first with drink driving so as to take advantage of the provision placing upon the defendant the burden of proving that he had taken drink after the traffic accident and before testing. It iintended then to present a charge of causing death by dangerous driving in the Crown Court using that admission.
Held: This was an abuse. The almost invariable rule is that where a person is tried on a lesser offence he is not to be tried again on the same facts for a more serious offence. A contrary course of action would amount to an abuse of the process of the court. Neill LJ referred to the ‘almost invariable rule that where a person is tried on a lesser offence he is not to be tried again on the same facts for a more serious offence’.
Garland J said that the case of Connelly is authority for the following: ‘(1) Pleas of autrefois acquit and autrefois convict must relate to a crime which is the same, or in the effect the same, as that originally charged. (2) There is a wider principle that a second trial involving the same or similar facts may in the discretion of the court be stayed if to proceed would be oppressive or prejudicial and therefore an abuse of the process of the court.’

Judges:

Neil LJ, Garland J

Citations:

[1990] RTR 228

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedConnelly v Director of Public Prosecutions HL 1964
Plea of Autrefois Acquit is Narrow in Scope
The defendant had been tried for and acquitted of murder. The prosecution then sought to have him tried for robbery out of the same alleged facts. The House considered his plea of autrefois convict.
Held: The majority identified a narrow . .

Cited by:

CitedRegina v Beedie CACD 11-Mar-1997
Stay for Extended Autrefois Convict
The plea of autrefois convict applies only if the legal substance of the charges is same but the judge has a discretion. The plea is not limited to Connelly v DPP definitions, but is still narrow.
A 19-year-old girl died of carbon monoxide . .
ApprovedPhipps, Regina v CACD 14-Jan-2005
The appellant had been convicted of driving with excess alcohol. After complaints by the injured victim’s family he was further prosecuted for dangerous driving. He now appealed his conviction, having pleaded guilty when the judge failed to find an . .
DistinguishedRegina v Hartnett CACD 2003
The defendant had pleaded guilty in the magistrates’ court to an excess alcohol offence. He was then committed to the Crown Court for trial on an associated charge of dangerous driving on the same occasion. He pleaded guilty to that also. He . .
ExplainedLSA, Regina v CACD 16-May-2008
(Courts-Martial Appeals Court) The defendant had faced road traffic offence charges, but the court had discharged the case using the Forest of Dean case. The prosecutor sought to appeal but failed to give the undertaking with regard to taking no . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Road Traffic, Criminal Practice

Updated: 09 February 2022; Ref: scu.180641