The defendant was driving on an unfamiliar side road and met a main road. She turned right into oncoming traffic. She was driving in the wrong direction on the carriageway. She was not allowed at trial, to adduce evidence that there was no signage to indicate that she was obliged to turn left, and that the road was unfamiliar to her.
Held: The offence of dangerous driving had two requirements. First that, objectively speaking, the driving was dangerous, and second, that the defendant was in some way at fault. The offence of dangerous driving is not an absolute offence. The court should have admitted her evidence and therefore the appeal succeeded.
‘Fault’ does not necessarily involve deliberate misconduct or recklessness, or an intention to drive in a manner inconsistent with proper standards of driving; nor does it necessarily involve moral blame. Fault involved failure that is a falling below the standard of care or skill of a competent and experienced driver. Fault in this sense even though it is slight, or is a momentary lapse will be sufficient, if, if looked at sensibly, it is a cause of the dangerous situation although not necessarily the sole cause. Fault will be sufficiently proved by inference from the facts of the situation, but an accused is not precluded from avoiding that inference by proving some special fact relevant to the question of fault.
The Court overruled earlier cases suggesting that dangerous driving is an absolute offence.
Judges:
Megaw LJ
Citations:
[1971] 3 All ER 220, [1971] 2 QB 674, [1971] 3 WLR 343, 135 JP 529, 115 Sol Jo 608, 55 Cr App Rep 501, [1971] RTR 321
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Crime, Road Traffic
Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.655418