Traves, Regina (on the Application Of) v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 30 Jun 2005

The defendant appealed conviction involving allegations that he was driving. He was sat at the wheel of a vehicle being towed by means of a rigid steel bar. He denied that he was driving, but had both steered and braked.
Held: The magistrates had been entitled to find that he had been driving, having had control, if only partial, of the vehicle. The prosecutor had, after the magistrates retired, asked them to return to allow him to add further evidence as to the defendant’s continued disqualification pending taking an exteded driving test. ‘It is also still very clearly the law in the Crown Court . . that once a jury have been sent out to consider their verdict, no evidence may be called, and the rule is very strictly enforced . . the justices were not entitled to allow the prosecution to adduce the further evidence after they had retired to consider their verdict. ‘ The appeal succeeded.


Bean J


[2005] EWHC 1482 (Admin)




Road Traffic Act 1988 103(1)(b) 143


England and Wales


CitedRegina v MacDonagh CA 1974
The Road Traffic Acts do not define the word ‘drive’ and in its simplest meaning it refers to a person using the driver’s controls for the purpose of directing the movement of the vehicle. It matters not that the vehicle is not moving under its own . .
CitedWebb v Leadbetter QBD 1966
One of two witnesses whom the prosecution desired to call at the hearing of an information had not arrived. The available witness was called. The prosecution case closed. The defendant gave evidence and his case closed. The justices had retired to . .
CitedChristopher James Jolly v Director of Public Prosections Admn 31-Mar-2000
At trial in the magistrates court, the prosecution had failed to bring evidence that the computer used to analyse the defendant’s breath alcohol was in proper working condition. The defendant submitted no case to answer, and the magistrates allowed . .
CitedTuck v Vehicle Inspectorate Admn 24-Mar-2004
The defendant appealed a conviction for exceeding the gross permitted weight on a goods vehicle. The magistrates having heard the case, the defendant submitted there was no case to answer, the prosecution having failed to bring evidence as to the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Road Traffic

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.228906