Criminal

Road traffic - failure to provide specimen of breath for analysis - wishing to see law book prior to providing specimen not reasonable excuse for failureDirector of Public Prosecutions v Noe: DC (Roch LJ and Harrison J): 3 April 2000

The defendant motorist initially agreed to a police officer's request to provide a specimen of breath for analysis by an intoximeter at a police station.The defendant later changed his mind and said that he wanted to see a law book before providing a specimen.

The defendant was informed of the consequences of his failure to provide a specimen.The intoximeter aborted and the defendant was charged with an offence of failing to provide two specimens of breath for analysis contrary to s.7(6) of and Sch.2 to the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988.The justices found that when the defendant was asked to provide a specimen he refused, but that his request to see a solicitor, or alternatively, a law book prior to providing a specimen constituted a reasonable excuse for his failure to provide a specimen.

The prosecutor appealed.Michael Forster (instructed by the Crown Prosecution Service, Portsmouth) for the prosecutor.

The defendant did not appear and was not represented.Held, allowing the appeal, that the police officer had not informed the defendant that he could wait for his solicitor or consult a law book before providing a specimen and the defendant had not been granted any favour; that the defendant's response to the officer's request plainly constituted a refusal; that the justices had been correct to hold that the defendant had refused to provide a specimen; but that the justices had been wrong in law to hold that the defendant had provided a reasonable excuse under s.7 of the 1988 Act because he was not entitled to impose a condition that he would comply after he had read a law book; and that, accordingly, the defendant's request did not amount to a reasonable excuse.