The driver appealed against his conviction for speeding, saying that he had not been given the requisite notice within the 14 days required: ‘The notice of intended prosecution had been sent to him by first class ordinary post in circumstances where he would ordinarily have been expected to receive it in 14 days, but in fact it was delivered 16 days after the commission of the offence, apparently as a result of delivery delays following a postal strike. The prosecution conceded that the delivery was late.’
Held: The appeal succeeded. The letter had not been sent by recorded post or registered delivery, and so the deemed service provision did not apply. The notice of intended prosecution was not sent in time and could not be regarded as having been properly served.
Judges:
Elias LJ, Openshaw J
Citations:
[2009] EWHC 2924 (Admin)
Links:
Statutes:
Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 1(c)
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina v County of London Quarter Session Appeals Committee ex parte Rossi CA 1956
A bastardy summons had been served on the defendant but he had not been properly served with a written notice indicating the date of an adjourned hearing. He sought an order for certiorari to quash the decision of the court.
Held: Where there . .
Cited – Gidden v Chief Constable of Humberside Admn 29-Oct-2009
The driver appealed against his conviction for speeding, saying that he had not been given the requisite notice within the 14 days required: ‘The notice of intended prosecution had been sent to him by first class ordinary post in circumstances where . .
Cited – Groome v Driscoll QBD 1969
The defendant, prosecuted for a minor driving offence of driving without due care and attention, did not receive the information of intended prosecution within 14 days as the statute required. He appeal by case stated.
Held: Schedule 4 to the . .
Cited – Nicholson v Tapp 1972
A traffic summons had to be served within 14 days and it was sent by registered post on the fourteenth day, so that in the normal course of post it would not have arrived until after the 14 days had elapsed. The prosecution sought to rely upon the . .
Cited by:
Cited – Gidden v Chief Constable of Humberside Admn 29-Oct-2009
The driver appealed against his conviction for speeding, saying that he had not been given the requisite notice within the 14 days required: ‘The notice of intended prosecution had been sent to him by first class ordinary post in circumstances where . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Road Traffic
Updated: 05 August 2022; Ref: scu.380330
