The defendant driver had been stopped and required to provide a specimen of breath. She failed to do so, and gave no reason. At trial she produced nedical evidence, accepted by the magistrates, that she suffered asthma and a hyperventilation syndrome, but she was convicted after the magistrates concluded that she should have told the police of the reason.
Held: It would be wrong to import a requirement that was not set out in the statute. The appeal succeeded.
Judges:
Moses LJ, Sullivan J
Citations:
[2008] EWHC 305 (Admin), Times 10-Mar-2008
Links:
Statutes:
Citing:
Not to be followed – Teape v Godfrey 1986
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Road Traffic
Updated: 13 July 2022; Ref: scu.266039