1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136 
Accidents reported in 24 hours
Page 79
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
by Les Oldridge T Eng (CEI), MIMI, AMIRTE THE Road Traffic Act 1974 made a small but very important amendment to Section 25 of the 1972 Road Traffic Act, which deals with a driver's duty when he is involved in a road accident. This section requires that when owing to the presence of a vehicle on a road an accident occurs: (a) where some person other than the driver of that vehicle is injured, or; (b) where damage is done to another vehicle, or (c) where an animal, other than one being carried on the vehicle, is injured, the driver must stop. give any interested party his name and address and the name and address of the owner of the vehicle. If he is unable to exchange names and addresses at the scene of the accident he is obliged to report the accident to the police as soon as possible, and in any case within 24 hours.
The amendment extends the occasions when names and addresses must be exchanged or the accident reported to the police to those accidents where damage is caused "to any property constructed on, fixed to, growing in or otherwise forming part of the land in which the road is situated or land adjacent thereto".
This amendment widens the scope of the section considerably. It will now be necessary to report to the police accidents where a wall is damaged, a lamp-post knocked over or a manhole cover cracked if the owner of the property is not informed of what has occurred. The new paragraph contains the phrase "growing on" — so, presumably, if a double-deck bus knocks a limb off a tree which overhangs the road then , Section 25 will apply.
Considering the section generally there is always a duty to stop after these accidents. An offence is committed if a driver does not stop even though he subsequently reports the accident to the police. There is no rule that a driver is entitled to wait up to 24 hours before reporting an accident; he must report it"as soon as practicable"(Bulnian v Bennett) 1974 R.T. R.1.
The case of Harding v Price (1948) 1 KB 695 which clarifies the position of a driver genuinely unaware that he has been involved in a icollision becomes of even greater importance now that so many more accidents will have to be reported. In this case the driver of an artic was unaware that the trailer had collided with a stationary motor car owing to noise and vibration from his vehicle. It was held that the onus is on the prosecution to establish the fact that an accident had occurred and that the driver had not complied with the section, that is he had not stopped and exchanged names and addresses or reported the accident to the police.
If the driver then satisfies the court — and the onus of proof is on him — that he was unaware that an accident had occurred, he is entitled to be acquitted. Whether or not the court will be satisfied with the explanation will depend, of course, on the circumstances of the case.
There need not be a collision to make it necessary to report the accident. This is illustrated in Quelch v Phipps (1955) 2Q. B. 107 where a passenger jumped off a bus at some traffic lights and injured himself. When the bus pulled up at the next official stop 60 yards away, the conductor went to the assistance of the injured man and when he returned to the bus he told the driver what had occurred. It was held that if there is some direct connection between the presence of the motor vehicle on the road and the accident there is an obligation to report it to the police or exchange names and addresses at the scene.
It could be argued that the defendant driver's vehicle need not even have been involved in the actual collision. Suppose, for example, a vehicle was being driven on the wrong side of the road and a driver travelling in the opposite direction swerved to avoid the approaching vehicle and hit and demolished a wall. Then it was owing to the presence of the first vehicle on the road that the accident occurred and the driver should comply with Section 25.