Road traffic law

by Paul Niekirk, barrister

Dangerous drivingThe test of dangerous driving under the Road Traffic Act 1988, section 2A, is wholly objective.

Hence a driver (whose actions are not involuntary) who causes a vehicle to behave in a dangerous manner because he unintentionally puts his foot on the accelerator instead of the brake pedal has no defence to a charge of dangerous driving (Attorney-General's Reference (No 4 of 2000) [2001] The Times, 27 March).Driver identificationWhere a person has been required to provide information to the police as to the identification of the driver of a vehicle under the Road Traffic Act 1988, section 177(2)(b), the subsequent use in evidence of a person's admission that he was the driver at the relevant time does not infringe his privilege against self-incrimination nor his right (under human rights legislation) to a fair trial, even though the original requirement to provide information contained no warning that a response to it might be used in evidence (DPP v Wilson [2001] The Times, 21 March).TachographsAn employer's liability for permitting contraventions of the EC Tachograph Regulation by its employee drivers is not a matter of strict liability and the offence involves something more than mere negligence in checking records.

It is necessary for the court to be satisfied that the employer had the requisite degree of knowledge, bearing in mind the causal connection between the employer's conduct and the drivers' contraventions and the need for the employer to have knowledge of the likelihood of contraventions, before finding the employer guilty of permitting (Yorkshire Traction Co Ltd v Vehicle Inspectorate [2001] The Times, 15 March).

In the same case, the Divisional Court pointed out that in such cases the court needed to reach a proper finding as to the person who in a corporate body was supposed to represent its mind and brains for the purpose of such prosecution.