Vehicle Inspectorate v Sam Anderson (Newhouse) Ltd: QBD 19 Oct 2001

To rely upon the defence of having broken the seal unavoidably, the defendant had to prove that the breaking or removal of the tachograph seal could not have been avoided in itself. It was not enough to show the breaking of the seal could not have been avoided, and nor did the word ‘avoid’ mean the same as ‘prevent’.


Lord Justice Pill and Mr Justice Poole


Times 15-Nov-2001


Transport Act 1968 97(4), Community Recording Equipment Regulation (EC Regulation 3821/85) (OJ 1985 L370/8)


England and Wales


Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.166811