The prosecution appealed dismissal of an allegation of speeding. The defendant had argued that the prosecution had not served the required evidence. The prosecution sought to rely upon the evidence of the officer.
Held: The provisions of section 20 were permissive and did not preclude the prosecution from adducing the evidence of the record in some other way.
Judges:
Owen J, Hallett LJ
Citations:
[2006] EWHC 312 (Admin)
Links:
Statutes:
Road Traffic Offenders (Prescribed Devices) Order 1999 20
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Flegg 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 . .
Cited – Griffiths v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 22-Mar-2007
Photographic output was part of device process
The defendant appealed his conviction for speeding, complaining at the technical accuracy of the Gatso camera used, and the use of photographs developed from pictures taken by the cameras.
Held: The photographs used for analysis were records . .
Cited – Iaciofano v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 15-Jul-2010
The defendant appealed against his conviction for speeding, saying that the device used to measure his speed was not approved. The only evidence relied on was that the officer said it had been installed in many police vehicles.
Held: The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Road Traffic
Updated: 22 May 2022; Ref: scu.239152