Director of Public Prosecutions v Orchard: Admn 17 Oct 2000

The prosecution appealed a finding of no case to answer against a defendant accused of driving with excess alcohol. On being offered a choice of blood or urine test, he had asked ‘What is the quickest way out of here’ which the officer recorded as declining to accept the offer. The magistrates had relied upon Jackson and Stanley. He had not been asked if there was any medical reason why he should not give a specimen.
Held: The defendant had suffered no prejudice (as required in Stanley) within the procedure by any failure of the officer.


[2000] EWHC Admin 402




Road Traffic Act 1988 8(2)


CitedDirector of Public Prosecutions v Jackson, Stanley v Director of Public Prosecutions HL 29-Jul-1998
When requesting a drink driver suspect to give a specimen of blood, an officer’s failure to say that the specimen will be taken by a doctor was not fatal to the prosecution. The issue of whether the blood sample was to be taken had properly been . .
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Road Traffic

Updated: 29 May 2022; Ref: scu.140218