header-logo header-logo

28 June 2007 / Alec Samuels
Issue: 7279 / Categories: Features
printer mail-detail

Road kill

Alec Samuels questions whether the new offence of death by careless driving will improve safety and justice on the roads

Everybody knows the problem. There are over 3,000 deaths a year on our roads in “accidents”. By a piece of “unfortunate” driving the driver (D) caused the death of the victim (V), who might be a child. There was not enough evidence to prove dangerous driving and causing death by dangerous driving, so D was prosecuted for careless driving, convicted, and fined—custody not being available. The bereaved family was outraged.
Now, courtesy of the Road Safety Act 2006 (RSA 2006), s 20(1), we have the new offence of causing death by careless driving, with a maximum of one year’s imprisonment and/or a level 5 fine in magistrates’ courts,  and five years’ imprisonment in crown courts:

“A person who causes the death of another person by driving a mechanically propelled vehicle on a road or other public place without due care and attention, or without reasonable consideration for other persons using the road or place, is guilty of

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

Withers—Sophie Barrett-Brown

Withers—Sophie Barrett-Brown

Withers drives further growth in its UK immigration team with new partner Sophie Barrett-Brown

Venus Legal—Esther Amoako

Venus Legal—Esther Amoako

Venus Legal invests in next generation of legal talent as specialist litigation practice grows

Fisher Phillips—Catrina Smith

Fisher Phillips—Catrina Smith

Fisher Phillips continues momentum in London with arrival of Catrina Smith

NEWS
Restrictions on workplace non-disclosure agreements could make settlements slower, more complex and more expensive when reforms expected in 2027 take effect
Private prosecutors face closer scrutiny under Crown Prosecution Service guidance designed to strengthen accountability and consistency when intervention is requested
Foreign states cannot necessarily claim immunity for cyber operations launched abroad against computers in Britain, following a divided Supreme Court ruling
Defendants who make unsupported complaints about their lawyers risk losing legal aid while confiscation proceedings continue without representation
Lawyers advising Russian clients face different sanctions restrictions across the UK, EU and US, despite their shared objective of increasing pressure on Russia
back-to-top-scroll