HOW MANY USERS?
Page 42
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
• My driver and I were prosecuted for using a vehicle when it was overloaded. The driver pleaded guilty so I argued
that I should not have been charged because either the driver was at fault or I was at fault. Because he had accepted that he was to blame I feel that should have been the end of it. 'What is your view ?
• Where a vehicle is found to exceed its Construction 8i. Use weight limit, a prosecution can be brought, under Section 41B of the Road Traffic Act 1998, against a person who 'used" the vehicle on a road or "caused" or "permitted" the vehicle to be so used.
On many occasions,the High Court has ruled that the "user" of a vehicle is the driver but, if he is driving the vehicle under a contract of service with an employer (and the driving is on the employer's business), then the employer is also a "user" of the vehicle. Your view that either the driver or his employer—not both—can be prosecuted is incorrect. They can both be liable.
The charges of "causing" or "permitting" can be brought against an employer or any other person, such as a director or transport manager, who had some control over the vehicle at the time,
To prove that a person "caused" an offence, the prosecution has to produce evidence that he or she gave an instruction to the driver, express or implied, to use the vehicle knowing that an offence would arise. To prove a "permitting" offence, the prosecution has to prove the defendant had knowledge of the facts giving rise to the offence, or turned a blind eye to what would be obvious.
Where a vehicle is operated by a company, a situation could arise where the driver and company were prosecuted for "using" the vehicle and the director(s) and transport manager for "causing" or "permitting" the use of the vehicle.
But the prosecution cannot charge a person with using, causing or permitting an offence—it has to decide which of the three to proceed with.