header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
07 August 2008 / Andrew Keogh
Issue: 7333 / Categories: Features
printer mail-detail

Crime brief

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Road safety

The Road Safety Act 2006 (Commencement No 4) Order 2008 (SI 2008/1918)

This order brings into force from 18 August 2008 the following provisions of the Road Safety Act 2006.

Section 20 inserts a new s 2B into the Road Traffic Act 1988 (RTA 1988) to create an offence of causing death by driving without due care and attention, or without reasonable consideration for other persons. Section 21 inserts a new section 3ZB into RTA 1988 to create an offence of causing death by driving when unlicensed, disqualified or uninsured. Section 30 (which has previously been commenced in part) inserts a new s 3ZA into RTA 1988 to explain when a person is to be regarded as driving without due care and attention, or without reasonable consideration for other persons.

The sentencing guidelines council has issued the following definitive guideline: causing death by careless or inconsiderate driving carries a maximum penalty of five years; causing death by driving, unlicensed, disqualified or uninsured drivers carries a maximum of two years (see tables above for more

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Policing the safeguards when appointing trust corporations
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
NLJ this week: What the court considers when assessing refusal of ADR
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
NLJ this week: Finding innovative ways to fund the justice gap
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
NLJ this week: Two’s company, but three’s a crowd in financial provision cases
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
Charities Appeals Supplement: March 2026
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll