The defendant had been charged only with driving to the danger of the public and with driving without due care and attention. He was acquitted by the justices and the prosecutor appealed.
Held: He should have been convicted of both offences and a direction for remission was made. A man who became unconscious whilst driving due to the onset of a sudden illness should not be made liable at criminal law, however in this case: ‘it was his business to keep awake. If drowsiness overtook him while driving, he should stop and wait until he recovered himself and became fully awake the driver must have known that drowsiness was overtaking him. The case was too clear for argument.’
Judges:
Humphreys J
Citations:
(1945) 61 TLR 452
Cited by:
Cited – Hill v Baxter QBD 1958
The Court was asked whether the accused had put forward sufficient evidence on a charge of dangerous driving to justify the justices adjudging that he should be acquitted, there having been no dispute that at the time when his car collided with . .
Mentioned – Regina v Quick CACD 18-Apr-1973
The defendant appealed against his conviction for assault. He had pleaded guilty after a ruling by the judge as to the meaning of the phrase ‘a defect of reason, from disease of the mind’ within the meaning of the M’Naughten Rules. More particularly . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Crime, Road Traffic
Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.539360
