header-logo header-logo

Drivers' sentencing guidelines "problematic"

17 January 2008
Issue: 7304 / Categories: Legal News , Public
printer mail-detail

News

Guidelines for sentencers dealing with driving offences resulting in death, released for consultation by the Sentencing Guidelines Council, have drawn mixed reactions.

The council’s consultation guidelines cover four offences, including, most controversially, the recommendation that those who cause death by careless driving should serve up to three years in prison. In cases involving “momentary inattention” and no aggravating factors, offenders should receive a community sentence.

Mio Sylvester, a partner at motoringlawyers.com, says although making careless driving an imprisonable offence satisfies public demand for serious punishment where death occurs, it’s problematic.
“The new sentencing powers that a driver can be imprisoned for making human mistakes without moral culpability is a departure that is likely to result in some difficult and unfair sentencing cases.”
“Notwithstanding the recommendation of community penalties which, arguably, strike the right sentencing balance, magistrates and judges are likely to be hard pressed by the Crown Prosecution Service, grieving relatives and tabloid journalists and the temptation will be to take a hard line unless and until the Court of Appeal rules otherwise,” Sylvester says.

Road safety charity Brake, however, is horrified that those who cause death by careless driving may only get a community sentence.

A spokeswoman says: “If these recommendations are adopted, there is a danger that the current situation—in which killer drivers too often walk free—will continue. Brake believes a custodial sentence is the correct starting point.”

Draft guidance on: causing death by dangerous driving; causing death by careless driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs; and causing death by driving unlicensed, disqualified or uninsured, was also issued by the council. For most offences, courts will need to assess how bad the driving was and the degree of danger created.

The Motor Insurers’ Bureau welcomes the recognition that people who cause death when driving without insurance justifies more than a fine.
A spokesman says: “These changes only deal with cases where death has ensued. Unfortunately for too long the crime of driving without insurance has not attracted the punishment that reflects the seriousness of the offence.”

Issue: 7304 / Categories: Legal News , Public
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Kingsley Napley—Claire Green

Kingsley Napley—Claire Green

Firm announces appointment of chief legal officer

Weightmans—Emma Eccles & Mark Woodall

Weightmans—Emma Eccles & Mark Woodall

Firm bolsters Manchester insurance practice with double partner appointment

Gilson Gray—Linda Pope

Gilson Gray—Linda Pope

Partner joins family law team inLondon

NEWS
The landmark Supreme Court’s decision in Johnson v FirstRand Bank Ltd—along with Rukhadze v Recovery Partners—redefine fiduciary duties in commercial fraud. Writing in NLJ this week, Mary Young of Kingsley Napley analyses the implications of the rulings
Barristers Ben Keith of 5 St Andrew’s Hill and Rhys Davies of Temple Garden Chambers use the arrest of Simon Leviev—the so-called Tinder Swindler—to explore the realities of Interpol red notices, in this week's NLJ
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys [2025] has upended assumptions about who may conduct litigation, warn Kevin Latham and Fraser Barnstaple of Kings Chambers in this week's NLJ. But is it as catastrophic as first feared?
Lord Sales has been appointed to become the Deputy President of the Supreme Court after Lord Hodge retires at the end of the year
Limited liability partnerships (LLPs) are reportedly in the firing line in Chancellor Rachel Reeves upcoming Autumn budget
back-to-top-scroll