Mohindra v Director of Public Prosecutions; Browne v The Chief Constable Of Greater Manchester: Admn 15 Mar 2004

The defendants had been required to provide information leading to the identification of the driver. In one case the defendant was the registered keepr, and in the second not.
Held: the obligations differed according to whether it was addressed to the registered keeper. In the one case to gave the information, and under the second, to provide such information as they had. The two differing obligations created two offences. As charged the offences were bad for duplicity.
[2004] EWHC 490 (Admin), Times 30-Mar-2004, [2005] RTR 7
Bailii
Road Traffic Act 1988 172(2)(a)172(3)
England and Wales

Updated: 12 May 2021; Ref: scu.194702