Read the fine print on every summons
Page 44
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
f a summons against you contains a mistake, can this result in your acquittal? Suppose your name has been misspelt, the vehicle number misstated or the date incorrect, should you plead not guilty? The general rule is that the court has power to amend a summons even after the prosecution case is finished. If as a result, the defendant has been misled in any way then the court must grant an adjournment so that the prosecution can continue with its case.
Therefore if your name is misspelt on the summons, the prosecution can amend the name without even granting you an adjournment. Suppose, however, that you are prosecuted under the wrong name altogether. A leading case came before the High Court in 1974. The defendant was summoned for a speeding offence in the name of Geoffrey Thomas Loach. The defendant's correct name, however, was Geoffrey Thomas Allan. The magistrates wished to consider disqualification. The defendant was written to under the name of Loach and ultimately arrested. The magistrates found that the defendant had received the summons. As he had been stopped at the scene of the incident and served with the notice of intended prosecution, he was Fully aware it related to him.
The magistrates permitted an amendment of the summons to correctly name the defendant. That decision was upheld by the High Court. A similar decision was reached as long ago as 1915, in a case where the defendant's surname was correct but his Christian names were incorrect.
In both cases the court decided the correct defendant had been summoned and because he was not misled, no adjournment was granted. However, the position however may well be totally different if the person summoned is not the correct defendant. This frequently happens where limited companies are involved.
In 1984 a Company called A.J Bull Limited was summoned for an alleged offence of permitting a skip to be on a road unlit during the hours of darkness. The magistrates found that the skip had printed in large letters on it "A8J Bull". However, the true name of the owners of the skip and the parties who permitted it to be on the road was a company called Marco (Croydon) Limited/ Mt./ Bull Containers. There was another company within the group called Al Bull Limited. The divisional court Found that it was not permissible for the prosecution to amend the summons because it was more than a technical error. The wrong defendant had been summoned, therefore fresh proceedings had to be issued.
It happens frequently that an individual director of a company by mistake is summoned instead of the company. It will not be possible for the prosecution to amend such a summons to change the name to the name of the limited company. They will have to issue fresh proceedings. If more than six months has elapsed since the offence, in most cases they will be too late. The position can therefore be summarised as follows: • If there is a misspelling of the name or the wrong name for the defendant, the prosecution can amend the summons even outside the six-month period; • If the wrong defendant is summoned, then the prosecution cannot amend and must issue fresh proceedings. The advice to all individuals or companies receiving summonses is to read them carefully. Sometimes mistakes can be so fundamental that it will not be possible for the prosecution to correct them by amendments. Forewarned is forearmed so look carefully.