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 deeming provision in Schedule 4.
Held: The provision only appliied in circumstances where, in the ordinary course of post, the letter would have been received in time.

Citations:

[1972] 1 WLR 1044

Statutes:

Road Traffic Act 1962 Sch4

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedGroome 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 by:

CitedGidden 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: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.471009