Defending Common Motoring Offences | Free Advice | M.A.J Law Solicitors

Defending Common Motoring Offences

Top Five defences for drink driving, drug driving, failing to provide and speeding

---

Driving offences are some of the most commonly prosecuted crimes in England and Wales, given their impact on public safety. Below, we’ll explore four significant offences: drink driving, drug driving, failing to provide a sample of breath, and speeding. For each offence, we’ll outline what constitutes the offence, how prosecutions are carried out, and the top five defences commonly used, with a focus on how to challenge these charges effectively.

1. Drink Driving

Summary of the Offence
Drink driving, as defined under Section 5 of the Road Traffic Act 1988, occurs when a person operates a motor vehicle on a road or other public place while their blood alcohol concentration (BAC) exceeds the legal limit. The legal limits are:

• 35 micrograms of alcohol per 100 millilitres of breath

• 80 milligrams of alcohol per 100 millilitres of blood

• 107 milligrams of alcohol per 100 millilitres of urine

Drink driving charges are often perceived as straightforward, but there are many avenues for mounting a robust defence. The prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused was over the legal limit and in control of the vehicle, leaving room for potential challenges.

How It's Prosecuted

1. Initial Stop: Police may stop a driver based on erratic driving or during routine traffic checks. However, the legality of this stop can be questioned, especially if there was no reasonable suspicion.

2. Breath Test: Officers use a roadside breathalyser. If the reading exceeds the limit, the driver is arrested. The reliability of this initial test is often scrutinised in defence cases.

3. Evidential Testing: At the police station, further breath, blood, or urine tests are conducted. The defence can question whether these samples were taken and handled correctly.

4. Court Proceedings: Evidence from tests, witness statements, and police reports is presented. A conviction may lead to fines, disqualification, and even imprisonment in serious cases, but these outcomes can be avoided with a strong defence.

Top Five Defences for drink driving

1. Procedural Errors: If the police fail to follow correct procedures during the breath or blood test, the evidence may be inadmissible. For example, failure to provide the statutory warning about the consequences of non-compliance can invalidate the case.

2. Faulty Equipment: Challenging the reliability or calibration of the breathalyser or testing equipment. Maintenance logs or expert witnesses can reveal faults.

3. Rising Alcohol Levels: Arguing that alcohol levels rose after the driver was stopped but before testing, due to recent consumption. This is particularly effective if there was a delay in conducting the test.

4. Medical Conditions: Certain conditions (e.g., acid reflux, diabetes, or ketosis) can create false positives on a breathalyser. A medical expert’s testimony can strengthen this defence.

5. Lack of Evidence: The prosecution must prove that the driver was operating the vehicle while over the limit. If this cannot be established (e.g., the driver was stationary or sleeping), the case may be dismissed.

2. Drug Driving

Summary of the Offence
Drug driving, under Section 5A of the Road Traffic Act 1988, involves operating a vehicle while impaired by drugs or with levels of specified drugs above the prescribed limit. This includes both illegal substances (e.g., cannabis, cocaine) and some prescription medications (e.g., diazepam, morphine). Many drivers charged with drug driving are unaware that prescribed medications can lead to prosecution, highlighting the need for thorough legal advice.

How It's Prosecuted

1. Roadside Test: Police may conduct a roadside saliva swab or field impairment test if they suspect drug use. However, the accuracy of these tests is not infallible.

2. Arrest and Further Testing: Drivers who fail the roadside test are arrested and taken to the station for blood or urine tests. Mishandling or contamination of samples can be a key point of defence.

3. Laboratory Analysis: Blood samples are sent to a laboratory to confirm the presence and quantity of drugs. Delays or errors in this process can undermine the prosecution's case.

4. Court Proceedings: Prosecution presents toxicology reports, police evidence, and witness testimonies. Convictions can lead to driving bans, fines, and imprisonment, but robust defences can mitigate or overturn these outcomes.

Top Five Defences for drug driving

1. Prescribed Medication: Many drivers are prosecuted despite taking medication as prescribed. A defence may be viable if evidence shows the driver was compliant with medical advice and not impaired.

2. Unreliable Testing: Challenging the accuracy of roadside or laboratory tests due to contamination, improper handling, or technical errors. For example, roadside swabs are not always precise.

3. No Impairment: Arguing that the driver was not impaired despite drug presence. The mere detection of a drug does not necessarily indicate unsafe driving.

4. Procedural Breaches: Highlighting failures in police procedures, such as improper sample collection, failure to caution the driver, or neglecting to inform them of their rights.

5. Medical Exemptions: Demonstrating that a medical condition explains unusual test results or behaviour. An expert’s opinion can be critical in these cases.

3. Failing to Provide a Sample of Breath

Summary of the Offence
Under Section 7 of the Road Traffic Act 1988, it is an offence to refuse or fail to provide a breath, blood, or urine sample when lawfully required to do so by the police without a reasonable excuse. Despite the seemingly straightforward nature of this offence, there are many defences available to challenge the charge.

How It's Prosecuted

1. Request for a Sample: Police must inform the driver of their legal obligation to provide a sample and the consequences of refusal. Failing to do so can weaken the prosecution’s case.

2. Assessment of Excuses: If the driver refuses, the police consider any reasons given (e.g., medical issues). These reasons can form the basis of a defence if genuine.

3. Charge: If no valid excuse is provided, the driver is charged with failing to provide a sample. However, the charge must be backed by evidence of proper procedure.

4. Court Proceedings: Prosecution relies on police statements, video evidence, and the absence of a reasonable excuse to prove guilt. Penalties include fines, driving bans, and potentially imprisonment, but these outcomes are not inevitable.

Top Five Defences for 'failing to provide'

1. Medical Conditions: Proving that a condition (e.g., severe asthma, anxiety, or phobia) made it physically or mentally impossible to provide a sample. Medical evidence and expert testimony are crucial.

2. Improper Procedure: Arguing that the police failed to properly explain the legal requirement or consequences of refusal. For example, a failure to warn the driver about potential charges can render the case invalid.

3. Equipment Issues: Claiming that faulty equipment or improper use led to an inability to provide a valid sample. Calibration records and maintenance logs can support this defence.

4. Mistaken Identity: Demonstrating that the defendant was not the driver required to provide the sample. This can occur in cases involving multiple occupants in a vehicle.

5. No Legal Obligation: Arguing that the police had no lawful basis to demand a sample, such as lacking reasonable suspicion or failing to follow proper arrest procedures.

4. Speeding

Summary of the Offence
Speeding offences are governed by the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 and occur when a driver exceeds the speed limit on a given road. Speed limits vary depending on the type of road and vehicle. Although speeding is one of the most common traffic offences, there are numerous defences that can lead to a successful challenge.

How It's Prosecuted

1. Detection: Speeding is detected using devices like speed cameras, radar guns, or average speed checks. However, these devices are not immune to errors.

2. Notice of Intended Prosecution (NIP): The registered keeper of the vehicle receives an NIP and a request for driver information. Errors in this process can form the basis of a defence.

3. Fixed Penalty or Court Summons: Minor offences may result in a fixed penalty notice, while serious cases lead to court proceedings. However, the prosecution must prove the accuracy of their evidence.

4. Court Proceedings: Evidence, including camera footage or speed gun data, is presented. A conviction can lead to fines, penalty points, or disqualification, but strong defences can mitigate these outcomes.

Top Five Defences for speeding

1. Faulty Equipment: Challenging the accuracy or calibration of the speed detection device. Maintenance and calibration records can reveal issues.

2. Mistaken Identity: Proving that the defendant was not the person driving the vehicle at the time. This is particularly relevant in cases involving company vehicles or multiple drivers.

3. Emergency Situations: Demonstrating that speeding was necessary to avoid harm or danger. For example, transporting someone in a medical emergency can be a valid defence.

4. Inadequate Signage: Arguing that speed limit signs were missing, obscured, or unclear. Photographic evidence can support this defence.

5. Procedural Issues: Highlighting errors in the issuance of the NIP, such as delays, incorrect information, or failure to send it within the required timeframe.

Conclusion

Driving offences like drink driving, drug driving, failing to provide a sample, and speeding carry significant consequences, ranging from fines to imprisonment. However, the law allows for robust defences to ensure that only those genuinely guilty are convicted. If you’re facing any of these charges, it’s essential to seek expert legal advice to explore potential defences and protect your rights.

What our clients say...