KNOW YOUR RIGHTS
In this month’s edition we have a special feature dedicated to the offence of driving without due care and attention, also known as careless driving. It is an offence often talked about yet little is known about the law behind it. All of us probably admit we have driven carelessly at some point, but when does it become an offence? When is a driver improvement course appropriate instead of prosecution? And can you be disqualified?
THE OFFENCE
Section 3 Road Traffic Act 1988: “if a person drives a mechanically propelled vehicle on a road or other public place without due care and attention, or without reasonable consideration for other persons … he is guilty of an offence”
There are two definitions under the Act. Technically they are sepa- rate offences but they are both prosecuted under the same section.
1) A person is to be regarded as driving without due care and attention if…the way he drives falls below what would be ex- pected of a competent and careful driver.
2) A person is to be regarded as driving without reasonable consideration…if persons are inconvenienced by his driving.
EXAMPLES In practice, every incident needs to be examined on its own merits.
There is no all-encompassing definition of careless driving. The Highway Code is a good start but simply following the rules doesn’t necessarily mean you’re not driving carelessly. And the opposite is true too; not following the Highway Code doesn’t automatically mean you are guilty of driving without due care.
Whether someone is driving carelessly entirely depends on its own facts and whether that particular driving has fallen below the stan- dard of a careful and competent driver or whether they have caused inconvenience.
Below are some general principles outlined in case law which can apply:
• McCrone v Riding 1983; the test whether a defendant is guilty of careless driving is an objective one. What the prosecution must prove is that the defendant has departed from the standard of a competent and careful driver in all the circumstances. This is a question of fact.
• If the defendant fails to exercise due care they are guilty whether or not the failure is due to inexperience.
• It does not matter whether it was a deliberate act or an error of judgement (Taylor V Rogers 1960).
• No motorist is expected to achieve a standard of perfection when they are suddenly confronted with an emergency (Jones v Crown Court at Bristol 1985).
• A following driver who collides with a vehicle making an emer- gency stop is not automatically driving without due care and attention (Scott v Walker 1974); nor is a driver who emerges from
98
a side road and collides with a vehicle on a main road (Walker V Tolhurst 1976); whether the driving is careless depends on the facts of the particular case.
• A driver who allows themself to be overcome by sleep is guilty of at least careless driving (Kay v Butterworth 1945).
• Where a driver finds themself unexpectedly blinded by head- lights or the sun, then unless the loss of vision or control imme- diately ceases they should stop at once. If during the literal second or two while they are blinded an accident occurs, which is due entirely to that loss of vision, they are not guilty of careless driving. But if the accident occurs more than two seconds after the loss of vision and the driver has not done anything about reducing speed or stopping, they should generally be found guilty of careless driving for continuing to drive when they could not see properly (S v Lombard 1984, South Africa).
• Where the only evidence is the defendant’s vehicle leaving the road and a collision occurring with a wall, a pole, or ending up in a ditch etc, in the absence of an explanation from the defendant a court should find the driver guilty of careless driving (Rabjohns v Burgar 1972). However, if an explanation, other than a fanciful explanation, is given by the defendant it is for the prosecution to disprove it, and unless it is disproved the defendant is entitled to the benefit of the doubt.
• Where the defendant has been deprived control of the vehicle due to a defect, then they cannot be said to be driving without care and attention (R v Spurge 1961).
FAILING TO STOP/REPORT
Where an accident has occurred, the driver must stop and exchange details with any person who requires them to do so.
The obligations only arise where there has been an injury to a per- son, animal or property. If there is no damage/injury, then there is no duty to stop and report.
A person can only stop/report if they are aware that accident has occurred (Harding v Price 1948). Although, a person is stated to have knowledge of the accident if they wilfully shut their eyes to the obvious.
In Lee v Knapp 1966 it was held that “stop” means to stop and remain at the scene of an accident for enough time to allow persons who had a right to do so to ask the driver their information.
In McDermott v DPP 1997 a driver who carried on driving for 80 yards then stopped was convicted of failing to stop.
The driver does not have to wait indefinitely (Norling –v- Wollacott 1964).
Furthermore, there is nothing in the statute to require a person to go around knocking on doors to find anybody who might need their details, especially given the time of night (Mutton –v- Bates 1984).
If the driver does not stop and exchange details, then they must re- port the accident at a police station or to a police constable as soon as reasonably practicable and in any case within 24 hours. The duty is not complied with if the person calls 101 to report the accident (Wisdom v MacDonald 1983).
Nor is the duty complied with if the driver merely leaves a note on OCTOBER 2020
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112
