header-logo header-logo

20 September 2007
Issue: 7289 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

ROAD TRAFFIC

R v Myers and another [2007] EWCA Crim 599, [2007] All ER (D) 241 (Feb)

Three cars was travelling in convoy and were being driven dangerously. One car crashed because the driver attempted a handbrake turn; the driver was killed.

There was no contact between the three cars; the cause of the accident was the manner of the deceased’s driving. The other two drivers were charged with dangerous driving. They had not been given any warning notice under RTOA 1988, s 1(1). 

HELD The policy behind the exception in RTOA 1988, s 2(1) is that drivers who have committed a relevant road traffic offence and whose vehicles are involved in or concerned with an accident do not need the warning or notification prescribed by s 1 because the very fact of being involved or concerned with the accident is a sufficient indication of the risk of prosecution.

Section 2(1) requires both the commission of a road traffic offence and an accident occurring at the time of the offence, or immediately after it, owing to the presence on the road of a vehicle in respect of which the offence was committed. Although in many cases the offence would be the (or at least a) cause of the accident, s 2(1) does not so require.

Rather, it requires there to be a sufficient causal link between the offence and the accident that the driver does not need to be warned of the risk of prosecution. In this case, there was a sufficient causal link between the deceased’s accident and the presence on the road of the vehicles driven by the defendants, as the accident occurred owing to the presence on the road of all three dangerously driven vehicles.

Issue: 7289 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Regional law firm expands employment team with partner and senior associate hires

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Nottinghamtrusts, estates and tax team welcomes two senior associates

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The cab-rank rule remains a bulwark of the rule of law, yet lawyers are increasingly judged by their clients’ causes. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian McDougall, president of the LexisNexis Rule of Law Foundation, warns that conflating representation with endorsement is a ‘clear and present danger’
Holiday lets may promise easy returns, but restrictive covenants can swiftly scupper plans. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Francis of Serle Court recounts how covenants limiting use to a ‘private dwelling house’ or ‘private residence’ have repeatedly defeated short-term letting schemes
Artificial intelligence (AI) is already embedded in the civil courts, but regulation lags behind practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ben Roe of Baker McKenzie charts a landscape where AI assists with transcription, case management and document handling, yet raises acute concerns over evidence, advocacy and even judgment-writing
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
back-to-top-scroll