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

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Investigations and corporate crime expert joins as partner

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Veteran funds specialist joins investment funds team

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Firm enhances competition practice with London partner hire

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
back-to-top-scroll