Dibble v Ingleton: 1972

A motorist was suspected of driving under the influence of alcohol and was required to provide a specimen of breath. He claimed that he had consumed alcohol only a few minutes earlier and the constable had to wait until 20 minutes had elapsed before administering a breath test. Meanwhile the appellant consumed more alcohol supplied to him by a passengers so making it impossible for the constable to perform his duty under the Road Safety Act. The question for the court was whether the drinking of alcohol, with the intention of making it impossible to ascertain from a specimen taken subsequently if the level of alcohol in his body when he was stopped exceeded this prescribed limit, could amount to wilful obstruction of the officer in the execution of his duty.
Held: Obstruction may consist in persisting in conduct of a positive nature which is, taken by itself, entirely lawful.
Bridge J said: ‘For my part I would draw a clear distinction between a refusal to act, on the one hand, and the doing of some positive act on the other. In a case, as in Rice v Connolly [1966] 2 Q.B. 414, where the obstruction alleged consists of a refusal by the defendant to do the act which the police constable has asked him to do – to give information, it might be, or to give assistance to the police constable – one can see readily the soundness of the principle, if I may say so with respect, applied in Rice v Connolly, that such a refusal to act cannot amount to a wilful obstruction under section 51 unless the law imposes upon the person concerned some obligation in the circumstances to act in the manner requested by the police officer.
On the other hand, I can see no basis in principle or in any authority which has been cited for saying that where the obstruction consists of a positive act, it must be unlawful independently of its operation as an obstruction of a police constable under section 51. If the act relied upon as an obstruction had to be shown to be an offence independently of its effect as an obstruction, it is difficult to see what use there would be in the provisions of section 51 of the Police Act 1964.’

Judges:

Bridge J

Citations:

[1972] 1 QB 480

Statutes:

Police Act 1964 51(3)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedRice v Connolly 1966
No Legal Duty to Assist a Constable
At common law there is no legal duty to provide the police with information or otherwise to assist them with their inquiries. Lord Parker set out three questions to be answered when asking whether there had been an obstruction of an officer in the . .

Cited by:

CitedLaporte, Regina (on the application of ) v Chief Constable of Gloucestershire HL 13-Dec-2006
The claimants had been in coaches being driven to take part in a demonstration at an air base. The defendant police officers stopped the coaches en route, and, without allowing any number of the claimants to get off, returned the coaches to London. . .
CitedLunt v Director of Public Prosecutions QBD 1993
The defendant had been in a road traffic accident. The police came to his house to investigate the accident, but he refused to unlock the door to allow them entry. Stating reliance on section 4 of the 1988 Act, the officers threatened to force . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Crime

Updated: 14 May 2022; Ref: scu.247479