illegal act amounts to manslaughter, it is obvious that such
Page 61
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
an attitude was clearly illogical. Nonetheless, Parliament has had to face the fact that such an attitude existed.
The new offence has exactly the same essentials as the existing offence of dangerous driving under Section 11 of the Road Traffic Act, 1930, and in fact is no more than dangerous driving resulting in death. A loophole provides that where a jury is not satisfied that the driving was the cause of the death but is still satisfied that the driving was dangerous, they may convict of the lesser offence.
Sale of Unfit Vehicles
ANOTHER new offence is no more than the elimination of an anomaly which was brought to light by the case of Vinall v. Howard (1954) concerning the prohibition by Section .8 of the Road Traffic Act, 1934, of the -sale of vehicles not complying with the regulations as to construction and use.
That case•made it clear that only infringements of Part II of the Construction and Use Regulations were within this prohibition, and accordingly Section 7 of the new Act now brings all infringements under Part III of the Regulations which deal with brakes, steering gear and tyres within the prohibition, and in addition includes any contravention in respect of lighting equipment or reflectors.
Increased Penalties for Existing Offences
ONE of the methods employed by 1he Act to bring home to people the grave situation on the roads is intended to be the greatly increased penalties for motoring offences. Nevertheless, it is quite possible to argue that virtually no greater deterrent effect is now produced than was effected by the passing of the Road Traffic Act, 1930, because of the fall in the value of money. However that may be, the-follovling increased penalties are now in operation:— Dangerous or reckless driving: (first offence) £100 and/or four months' imprisonment (formerly £50 and no imprisonment); (second or subsequent offences) £100 and/or six months (formerly £100 and/or four months) and at least nine months' disqualification. Careless driving: (first offence) £40 (formerly £20); (second or subsequent offences) £80 and/or three months (formerly £50 or three months) and possible disqualification for any period (formerly three months only). Driving under the influence of drink or drugs: (first offence) £100 and/or four months (formerly £50 or four months);. (second or subsequent offence) £100. and/or six months (formerly £100 and/or four months) or, upon indictment, imprisonment not exceeding two years (six months).
Another change is the empowering of courts to order that a driver be disqualified after a conviction of being "drunk in charge" until he passes a driving test. •
New Defences Available
THE ridiculous tangle the law had got itself into in interpreting that part of Section 15 of the Act of 1930 which refers to being "under the influence" when in charge of a vehicle—commonly known as "drunk in charge "— has now been straightened out. Until now, if a driver realized he was in no condition to drive and wished to avoid the consequences of being found in charge of his car, it was almost impossible for him to divest himself of this authority effectively.
The situation had got to such a pitch that on one occasion the police had the effrontery to prosecute a man for this offence when he was inside his own home with his car outside in the street—fortunately without success.
The fact that this could occur, however, was a clear warning that the evils against which the Section was aimed were being forgotten, and this is now remedied by Section 9 of the new Act, which provides not only for punishment of the offence of being in charge under such circumstances at the former rate of fine and/or imprisonment—as opposed to the increased penalties now applicable for actually driving already discussed—but also a new defence to the charge itself.
A person is now not to be deemed to be "in charge of" a vehicle if he proves—and the onus of proof is upon him —that at the material time the circumstances were such that there was no likelihood of his driving while he remained unfit to drive, also that he has not in fact driven the vehicle while he was unfit to do so.
This is clearly designed to meet the case of the man who realizes he is unfit to drive and hands over the ignition key to a friend, but it almost certainly would not cover the case of a driver who stops to "sleep it off" in the back of his vehicle.
Additional Ground of Appeal
AN additional right of appeal is given by Section 28 of the Act in respect of a finding by magistrates that no "special reasons" exist for not imposing an otherwise obligatory period of disqualification.
It will be remembered that disqualification is automatic on a second offence of dangerous or reckless driving or on a first offence of driving under the influence, and that the special reasons which empower the court to ignore this obligation must be connected with the offence and not with the offender, but formerly there' was no appeal against the court's decision on this point.
Defence in No-Insurance Cases
FOLLOWING the forthright comments of Lord Goddard in several cases, the Act now accepts the principle that the correct person to be charged when a vehicle is being driven without an effective third-party insurance in force is the employer—when someone other than the latter is driving at the time.
Section 29 provides a complete defence to a driver charged with the offence if he proves: (a) that the vehicle was neither his nor in his possession by reason of hire or loan; (b) that he was using it in the course of his employment; and (c) that he neither knew nor had reason to believe there was no proper insurance in force.
Finally, under this part may be noticed the provisions of Section 30 which extend to the offences of failing to conform with traffic signs or directions and of leaving a vehicle in a dangerous position, the requirement (under Section 21 of the 1930 Act) of being warned at the time that a prosecution might result or being actually summoned or warned by notice within 14 days.
Miscellaneous Provisions
MANY Sections of the Act are devoted to the parking problem and, as is well known, the Act authorizes
charges for street parking. This is a complete topic in itself and cannot be discussed here. The same comment applies to the extensive Sections dealing with traffic regulations, signs and experimental schemes.
Several of the provisions of the Road Traffic Acts dealing with dangerous or careless driving and with driving under the influence of drink or drugs are now extended—and rightly—to cyclists, and both pedestrians and dog-owners have the eye of the law directed upon them by the creation of new offences.
The issue of driving licences has been overhauled— including the issue of provisional licences—and the opportunity taken to iron out minor anomalies. Licences in future will last for three years and will cost 15s.
The speed limit has been put upon a permanent statutory basis, and lighting-up time is now to be calculated the same way whether "summer time" is in force or not.
It remains to notice that the Act does not extend to Northern Ireland and that it does not come into operation until the Minister so appoints by statutory instrument, and further that he may, if he so wishes, bring it all into force at once or different parts at different times. At the moment of writing no such appointed day has been named.