Weighbridge ruling hits code defence
Page 4
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
by Sally Nash IIII Prosecutions for overloading offences could soar following a Court of Appeal ruling which will make it almost impossible for operators to challenge cases involving controversial dynamic axle weighbridges.
In the past lawyers have successfully argued that this type of weighbridge can be inaccurate if the code of practice is not followed.
Transport lawyer Jonathan Lawton is now set to contest the Court of Appeal judgement: it sets a legal precedent that should be binding on lower courts.
The Court of Appeal was rejecting appeals against overloading charges by Heanor Haulage and GE Curtis Heavy Haulage. It did not accept the argument that no evidence existed in these cases to show that the weighbridges had been tested or that they were operating accurately. The Court of Appeal rejected the view that it was the prosecution's responsibility to prove that the code of practice for dynamic axle weighbridges had been followed.
Lord Justice Kennedy accepted that hauliers could not know if a weighbridge was accurate, but added: "The reality is that a haulier knows, or ought to know, when his vehicle is overweight."
Lawton is so concerned by the decision that he has asked trade associations for funding to fight it—all the way to the House of Lords if necessary. "The effect of the decision will make it virtually impossible to challenge cases involving a dynamic weighbridge," he warns.
Ian Rothera, chairman of the Association of Road Transport Lawyers, adds: "It is obviously worrying if the courts are going to make assumptions that weighbridges are operating accurately. And the code of practice is there for a purpose—it is a safety-net."