Drink- and Drug-Drive Case Notes 4th ed
“this book is extremely useful when defending or prosecuting cases involving drink or drug driving.” Law Society Gazette (from review of 3rd edition).
Drink- and Drug- Drive Case Notes comprises summaries of the many cases on the drink- and drug- driving offences which have come before the higher courts. Over 600 judgments are summarised. Each note is presented as a headnote summarising the ratio of the case, a short statement of the facts, the issue(s) in the appeal and an extract from the judgment. The notes are intended to provide a broad outline of the trends in the case law and as starting points for readers seeking guidance on particular points.
The work is divided into chapters which follow, broadly, the stages in an investigation: the requirement to provide specimens of breath, blood or urine; the offence of failing without reasonable excuse to cooperate or to provide specimens; challenges to the breath testing and breath analysis devices; the “statutory assumption” that the proportion of alcohol or a drug at the time of the offence was not less than in the specimen; evidence, including issues such as the admissibility of the printout from the breath analysis device and of the contemporaneous records of the procedure completed by the investigating officer; the discretion under PACE to admit or exclude evidence; definitions, notably of “public place”; defences, including no likelihood of driving while over the limit; special reasons for not disqualifying; and a host of procedural issues, featuring the courts’ insistence on compliance with the Criminal Procedure Rules.
This fourth edition includes notes of over fifty cases decided since the third edition was published. Themes running through the new cases include the availability of judicial review as a means of challenge, case management, the appropriateness of adjournments and preparedness for trial. Longer-standing issues have also been re-visited: the disclosure of records, consulting the forms completed during the investigation to refresh memory at trial, the discretion to admit or exclude evidence and burdens of proof.
- Subjects:
- Criminal Law, Road Traffic Law, Wildy, Simmonds and Hill
- Contents:
- Preface
- Table of Cases
- Table of Legislation
- 1 THE REQUIREMENT TO PROVIDE SPECIMENS’
- 1. The Arrest
- R v Fox, Fox v Chief Constable of Gwent; Gull v Scarborough; Hartland v Alden; DPP v Kay (John); DPP v Porter (Paul Nicholas); DPP v Robertson (Steven Gary); DPP v Wilson; R (CPS) v Wolverhampton Magistrates’ Court; Kohler v DPP
- 2. Random Stopping of Vehicles
- Chief Constable of Gwent v Dash; DPP v Minton
- 3. Reasonable Suspicion and Reasonable Belief
- Johnson v Whitehouse; Blake v Pope; DPP v Redling; DPP v McGladrigan; Whelehan v DPP; Grant v DPP
- 4. Trespass
- Morris v Beardmore; Clarke v DPP
- 5. In the Course of an Investigation
- Graham v Albert; Pearson v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis; Hawes v DPP; R v South Norfolk JJ ex p Keymer; DPP v Earnshaw (Neil Graham)
- 6. Medical Reasons why Breath Specimens cannot be Provided or should not be Required
- Horrocks v Binns; White & Gaskell v Proudlock; Dempsey v Catton; Davis (Paul) v DPP; Davies (Gordon Edward) v DPP; Webb v DPP; Young (Paula) v DPP; Francis v DPP; Steadman v DPP; Bodhaniya v CPS
- 7. Breath Analysis Device Unreliable, Unavailable, or not Practicable to Use
- Cotter v Kamil; Slender v Boothby; Morgan v Lee; Waite v Smith; Dye v Manns; Thompson v Thynne; Oxford v Baxendale; Chief Constable of Avon & Somerset v Kelliher; Chief Constable of Kent v Berry; Haghigat-Khou v Chambers; Stokes v Sayers; Tobi v Nicholas; Badkin v DPP; Denny v DPP; Dixon v Yardley; Wootton v DPP; Rathbone v DPP; Jarvis v DPP; Hague v DPP; Evans (Cyril) v DPP; Slasor v DPP; Bobin v DPP; Kneale v DPP; Kelsey v DPP
- 8. Device Having Produced Unreliable Indication
- DPP v Smith (Robert James); Hussain v DPP; McNeil v DPP; Taylor v DPP; DPP v Vince; Kang v DPP
- 9. Driver’s Condition Due to Some Drug
- Cole v DPP; Bell v DPP; Angel v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire; Watling v Chief Constable of Suffolk Constabulary and G4S Health Service (UK) Ltd; Twigg v R
- 10. The Procedure
- DPP v Carey; Chief Constable of Avon & Somerset v Singh; Murray v DPP; DPP v Warren; DPP v Garrett; DPP v Palmer (Carlton Lloyd); DPP v Ward (Andrew Stuart); DPP v Jackson; Stanley v DPP; Maudling v DPP; Clayton v DPP; Burke v DPP; Cawley (Stephen) v DPP; Beatrice v DPP; DPP v Coulter; R v Bryan; R (Cox) v DPP; Bielecki v DPP
- 11. Medical Reasons why a Blood Specimen cannot or should not be Taken
- Grix v Chief Constable of Kent; Wade v DPP; DPP v Wythe; DPP v Gibbons (Stuart Michael); Kinsella v DPP; Joseph v DPP
- 12. Hospital Patients
- Askew v DPP; Whelan v DPP; R v Burton upon Trent JJ ex p Woolley; Webber v DPP; Butler (Michael Joseph) v DPP; Whitfield v DPP; Townson v DPP; DPP v Tandey
- 13. Repeat Requirements and Multiple Specimens
- Blake v Bickmore; Sparrow v Bradley; Howard v Hallett; Owen v Morgan; Chief Constable of Avon & Somerset v Creech; Nugent v Ridley; Durdan v Chief Officer, Metropolitan Police; Morrison (Trevor) v DPP; Stewart (John Kimball) v DPP; Edmond v DPP
- 14. Urine Specimens
- Wyllie v CPS; Barnes v Chief Constable of Durham; DPP v Taylor (Graham)
- 2 SPECIMENS FOR LABORATORY TESTING
- 1. Taking Specimens: Blood
- Russell v Devine; Afolayan v CPS
- 2. Taking Specimens: Urine
- Ross v Hodges; R v Coward; Prosser v Dickeson; Over v Musker; DPP v Baldwin (Alistair); Ryder v CPS
- 3. Dividing the Specimen and Supplying Part
- Perry v McGovern; Dear v DPP; Butler v DPP; DPP v Elstob; DPP v Snook; Johnson (Antony Harold) v DPP; Mokhra v DPP; DPP v Higgins (Adam Scott); Campbell v DPP; Jones (Elaine) v CPS; O’Connell v DPP; Lidington v DPP; Blyth v CPS (Essex)
- 4. Analysis Techniques and Procedures
- R v Coomaraswamy; Lomas v Bowler; Sophocleous v Ringer; Stephenson v Clift; Yhnell v DPP; R v Bolton Magistrates’ Court ex p Scally and Other Cases; Gregory v DPP; Byrne (Simon David) v DPP; Dhaliwal v DPP; Carter v DPP; R v Bravender; R v Ward (Anderson Charles); R v Senior
- 5. The Analyst
- Stevens v DPP; CPS v Sedgemoor Justices
- 6. The 6 mg Allowance
- Walker v Hodgins; Oswald v DPP; DPP v Perkins; DPP v Welsh (Eric Thomas)
- 7. Back-Calculations
- Gumbley v Cunningham; Benham v DPP; R v Hodnitt
- 8. Certificates
- Anderton v Kinnard; Penman v Parker; Hawkins v DPP; Ramsey (Jennifer) v DPP; Louis v DPP; Whyte v DPP; Wooldridge v DPP; Jeffreys v Director of Public Prosecutions; DPP v Stephens; Brett v DPP; Clarke v CPS
- 9. The Provenance of the Specimen
- Tremlett v Fawcett; Gregson v DPP; McGinty v DPP; Rawal (Sushil) v DPP; Mills v DPP
- 3 FAILING WITHOUT REASONABLE EXCUSE TO COOPERATE OR TO PROVIDE SPECIMENS
- 1. The Meaning of “Failing”
- Smith v Hand; Campbell v DPP; DPP v Shuker; Smyth v DPP; Hingley-Smith v DPP; DPP v Lawrence (Scott James); May v DPP; DPP v Swan; Plackett v DPP
- 2. The Sufficiency of the Specimen
- Teape v Godfrey; Anderton v Waring; DPP v Heywood; Chand v DPP; DPP v Chand; DPP v Darwen; Rweikiza v DPP
- 3. Single Specimen Provided
- Stepniewski v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis; Oldfield v Anderton; Sykes v DPP; DPP v Byrne (David Stephen); DPP v Thomas (Elwyn Kenneth); DPP v Radford
- 4. Time for Providing Specime n
- Cosgrove v DPP; Walters (Julian) v DPP; Oberoi (Yash) v DPP; Robertson (Eric) v DPP
- 5. Whether Requirement Made under Section 6 or Section 7
- DPP v Karamouzis
- 6. Causing Death by Careless Driving Having Failed to Provide
- R v Coe (Christopher Steven)
- 4 REASONABLE EXCUSE
- 1. The Burden of Proof
- Neale v DPP; DPP v Crofton; McKeon v DPP; Piggott v DPP; R (Cuns) v Hammersmith Magistrates’ Court
- 2. Conditional Agreement
- DPP v Billington; Chappell v DPP; DPP v Rumble; Corywright v East; DPP v Whalley; DPP v Kirk; DPP v Smith (Alan Robert)
- 3. Medical Reasons
- R v Lennard; R v Harding; Woolman v Lenton; DPP v Boden; DPP v Judge; DPP v Daley; DPP v Curtis; DPP v Szarzynski; DPP v Hammond; DPP v Furby; Falzarano v DPP; DPP v Lonsdale; McMahon v CPS; Martiner v DPP; DPP v Mukandiwa; Pattison v DPP; Oladimeji v DPP; Longstaff v DPP; Atkinson v DPP
- 4. “Trying Hard”
- Grady v Pollard; DPP v Eddowes; DPP v Ambrose
- 5. Other Reasonable Excuse Arguments
- R v John; Beck v Sager; McGrath v Vipas; Dawes v Taylor; Spalding v Paine; Foster v Bentley; Ke’mp v Chief Constable of Kent; DPP v Fountain; Smith (Nicholas Paul) v DPP; Dickinson v DPP; DPP v Beech DPP v Pearman; De Freitas v DPP; DPP v Brodzky; DPP v Coyle; DPP v Meller; DPP v Grundy; DPP v Camp
- 5 CHALLENGING THE BREATH TESTING AND BREATH ANALYSIS DEVICES
- 1. Type Approval
- Bentley v Northumbria Police; Hayward v Eames; Kirkpatrick v Harrigan; Chief Constable of Northumbria v Browne; Young v Flint; Richardson v DPP; Kemsley v DPP; Skinner v DPP; Breckon v DPP; Rose v DPP; Coxon v Manchester City Magistrates’ Court
- 2. The Amount Said to Have Been Consumed
- Cracknell v Willis; DPP v Hill; Lafferty v DPP; DPP v Spurrier; Williams (John Robert) v DPP; Santos v Stratford Magistrates Court; CPS v Cipriani; R (Hassani) v West London Magistrates’ Court
- 3. Calibration
- R v Kingston upon Thames JJ ex p Khanna; R v Ealing JJ ex p Wheeler; Mayon v DPP; DPP v Parkin; DPP v Deveney; Prince v CPS; DPP v Schon; Dunwoodie v DPP; Derham v DPP; Melia v DPP; Gibson v DPP; Mercer v DPP; Haggis v DPP
- 4. The Date and Time
- Fawcett v Gasparics; Parker v DPP; DPP v McKeown, DPP v Jones (Christopher); DPP v Bateson
- 5. Mobile Telephones and Radios
- Scheiner v DPP
- 6. Mouth Alcoho l
- DPP v Browne; DPP v Teixeira; O’Sullivan v DPP
- 7. Positive Breath Analysis followed by Negative Screening Test
- Snelson v Thompson; Parish v CPS
- 8. The Printout
- Burditt v Roberts; Reid (Sheena) v DPP; DPP v Barber (David Anthony)
- 9. The Burden of Proof
- O’Sullivan (Sarah) v DPP; Ali v DPP
- 6 THE ASSUMPTION THAT THE PROPORTION OF ALCOHOL OR A DRUG AT THE TIME OF THE OFFENCE WAS NOT LESS THAN IN THE SPECIMEN
- 1. The Statutory Assumption
- Beauchamp-Thompson v DPP; DPP v Williams; Millard v DPP; Parker (Lee Christopher) v DPP; Griffiths (Richard Stephen) v DPP
- 2. Consuming Alcohol after Ceasing to Drive
- Thynne v Hindle; R v Newcastle upon Tyne JJ ex p Hindle; Dawson v Lunn; Lloyd v Knight; Rynsard v Spalding; Oxford v Fairhurst; DPP v Singh; DPP v Lowden; R v Wells Street JJ ex p Hobbs; DPP v Sangha; DPP v Ward (Kevin William); R v Drummond; Lonergan v DPP; DPP v Chambers; DPP v Ellery; DPP v Tooze; DPP v Bolton; DPP v Dukolli; Goldsmith v DPP; DPP v Ridings
- 7 EVIDENCE
- 1. The Printout
- Gaimster v Marlow; Chief Constable of Surrey v Wickens; Walton v Rimmer; R v Tower Bridge Magistrates’ Court ex p DPP; Hasler v DPP; Leeson v Haringey JJ and DPP; McCormack v DPP; Jubb v DPP; Hawke v DPP; R (Olajide) v Stratford Magistrates’ Court;
- 2. Admissibility of a Reading from a Preliminary Breath Test
- Smith (Stephen John Henry) v DPP;
- 3. The Record of the Procedure
- R v Pydar JJ ex p Foster; Williams v DPP
- 4. The Discretion to Admit or Exclude Evidence: Unfairness
- DPP v Godwin; Hudson v DPP; Daniels v DPP; Brown (Kevin Mark) v DPP; Worsley v DPP; DPP v MacPhail; Prouse v DPP; Ortega v DPP; Porceddu v DPP; Harper v DPP; Davis (Karl) v DPP; DPP v Davies; R (DPP) v Evans (Brychan Gethin John); DPP v Preston; Watson v DPP; DPP v Kennedy; R (Forde) v DPP; DPP v Carless; R (Marsh (Ian)) v DPP; Charles v DPP; Moore v Preston Crown Court; Stanesby v DPP; R v Ashworth; Miller v DPP
- 5. Legal Advice
- Campbell v DPP; Kennedy v CPS; Myles v DPP; Kirkup v DPP; Whitley v DPP; CPS v Rice; Causey v DPP; Gearing v DPP; Cowper v DPP; CPS v Chalupa; Ambrose v Harris; HM Advocate v M; HM Advocate v G; Thomas (William Morgan) v DPP
- 6. Hearsay
- Watson v DPP
- 7. Bad Faith
- Matto v Wolverhampton Crown Court; Thomas (Frank George) v DPP; DPP v Wilson; Ogden v DPP; Sharpe v DPP; R v Dolgellau JJ ex p Cartledge; R v Penrith JJ ex p Marks; Braham v DPP; DPP v Corthine
- 8. Oral Evidence
- Culleton v Palmer; Owen v Chesters; Chief Constable of Kent v Ellis; Mace v Dean; Will v DPP; Thom v DPP; Greenaway v DPP; Van Flute v DPP; Perkins v DPP; Leong v DPP; Cummings v CPS; DPP v Sugden
- 9. Evidence of Unfitness to Drive
- Leetham v DPP; Hurst v DPP; Willicott v DPP; R v Irvine; R v Mohamed (Ahmed)
- 10. Evidence of Careless Driving
- R v Millington
- 11. Witness Summonses and Disclosure
- R v Coventry Magistrates’ Court ex p Perks; R v Skegness Magistrates’ Court ex p Cardy; R v Manchester Crown Court ex p Williams; R v Teesside JJ ex p Payne; R v Kingston-upon-Hull JJ ex p Walton; R v Pirehill North JJ ex p Stoddard; R v Tower Bridge Magistrates’ Court ex p DPP; Fearnley v DPP; DPP v Wood; DPP v McGillicuddy; R (Cunliffe) v West London Magistrates’ Court; R (Cunliffe) v Ealing Magistrates’ Court; R (Cunliffe) v Hastings Magistrates’ Court; Rothon v DPP
- 12. Late Evidence
- Writtle v DPP
- 8 DEFINITIONS
- 1. Attempting to Drive
- R v Farrance; Kelly v Hogan; Mason v DPP; Moore v DPP
- 2. Breath
- Zafar v DPP; Woolfe v DPP
- 3. Consuming
- DPP v Johnson (David)
- 4. Conviction
- DPP v Haddigan
- 5. Driving
- R v MacDonagh; Rowan v Chief Constable of the Merseyside Police; McKoen v Ellis; Gunnell v DPP; DPP v Alderton
- 6. Drug
- Bradford v Wilson; R v Ealing Magistrates’ Court ex p Woodman; R v Norman
- 7. In Charge
- DPP v Webb; DPP v Watkins; DPP v Janman; CPS v Bate
- 8. Interview
- CPS v O’Shea; DPP v Rous and Davis; R (Ridehalgh) v DPP; Sneyd v DPP
- 9. Motor Vehicle
- Croitoru v CPS
- 10. Public Place
- Bowman v DPP; DPP v Vivier; DPP v Coulman; Edwards v DPP; R v Colchester JJ ex p Wood; Robinson v DPP; Taussik v DPP; Planton v DPP; DPP v Lloyd (David Michael); R (Lewis) v DPP; Cowan v DPP; Scott Richardson v DPP
- 11. Road
- Lang v Hindhaugh; Brewer v DPP; R (Dunmill) v DPP; Hallett v DPP; Avery v DPP
- 9 DEFENCES
- 1. Autrefois Acquit
- Broadbent v High; DPP v Porthouse; R v Truro & South Powder JJ ex p McCullagh; Williams (Alan Davies) v DPP
- 2. Consuming Alcohol after Ceasing to Drive
- 3. Duress/Necessity
- DPP v Jones (Jeremy); DPP v Bell (Derek); DPP v Davis; DPP v Pittaway; DPP v Rogers; DPP v Tomkinson; DPP v Hicks; DPP v Mullally; CPS v Brown (Christopher); Stevens v DPP
- 4. Insanity
- R v Birmingham JJ ex p Jacobs; DPP v Harper; R v Norman
- 5. No Likelihood of Driving
- DPP v Frost; Drake v DPP; Sheldrake v DPP; Attorney General’s Reference (No 4 of 2002); CPS v Thompson
- 10 SPECIAL REASONS
- 1. The Meaning of “Special”
- Whittall v Kirby; Chatters v Burke
- 2. Emergencies
- Taylor v Rajan; Fraser v Barton; Thompson v Diamond; Williams v Tierney; DPP v Waller; DPP v Sendell;
- DPP v Feeney; DPP v Knight; DPP v Doyle; DPP v Upchurch; DPP v Bird; DPP v Enston; DPP v Whittle; DPP v Cox; DPP v Bristow; DPP v Tucker; DPP v Goddard; DPP v Ellis; DPP v Ubhi; R (Khan) v DPP; DPP v Heathcote; Key v CPS
- 3. Laced Drinks
- Pugsley v Hunter; Pridige v Gant; Smith v Geraghty; James v Morgan; DPP v Younas; Smith (Ian Philip) v DPP; R v Cambridge Magistrates’ Court ex p Wong; DPP v O’Connor and Other Cases; Woodward (Mark de Maine) v DPP; DPP v Vincent; DPP v Winfield-Grant; Robinson v DPP; DPP v Sharma
- 4. The Distance Driven and the Degree of Danger
- Redmond v Parry; DPP v Thomas (Graham Derek); DPP v Corcoran (Joseph Patrick); DPP v Williams (Shane); Costello v DPP; DPP v Craddock; DPP v Elsender; CPS v Humphries; DPP v Conroy; DPP v Oram; DPP v Harrison; DPP v Cove
- 5. Unaware of Being over the Limit
- DPP v O’Meara; DPP v White; Bryant v DPP; DPP v Jowle; DPP v Anderson (Marilyn); DPP v Wynne
- 6. Personal Circumstances
- Bullen v Keay; DPP v Hyland; DPP v Crawford; DPP v Phillips (Richard Charles)
- 7. Medical Condition
- R v Wickins; R v Jackson; R v Hart; DPP v Williams (Rhys Aubrey)
- 8. Other Arguments
- Lodwick v Brow; Vaughan v Dunn; Bolliston v Gibbons; McCormick v Hitchins; Jane v DPP; DPP v Kinnersley; DPP v Daley (No 2); DPP v Murray (David John); Ng v DPP
- 9. Exercising the Discretion not to Disqualify/Endorse
- R v Ashford and Tenterden Magistrates’ Court ex p Wood; Mayhew v DPP; DPP v Barker; Donahue v DPP; Lane v DPP; Dixon-Watmough v Preston Justices; R v St Alban’s Crown Court ex p O’Donovan
- 11 OTHER ISSUES
- 1. Adjournments
- Walden v Highbury Corner Magistrates’ Court; Stern v Highbury Corner Magistrates’ Court; Essen v DPP; Filmer v DPP; Williams v DPP; Visvaratnam v Brent Magistrates’ Court; Balogun v DPP; Cherpion v DPP; DPP v Petrie; R (Jenkins) v Hammersmith Magistrates Court; DPP v Woods; Decani v City of London Magistrates’ Court and CPS; Bourne v Scarborough Magistrates’ Court; R (Gatenby) v Newton Ayecliffe (sic) Magistrates’ Court; R (DPP) v Sunderland Magistrates Court and Hanson; R (Kharaghan) v City of London Magistrates and CPS; R (Parashar) v Sunderland Magistrates’ Court and CPS; Saunders v Bristol Magistrates’ Court and CPS
- 2. The Case Stated
- R v City of London JJ ex p Ocansey; R v Warrington JJ ex p Worsley; R v Cheshire JJ ex p Henshaw;
- R v Fylde and Wyre JJ ex p Gornall; R (DPP) v Chorley Magistrates’ Court; DPP v Vince; Kang v DPP
- 3. Judicial Review
- R (Clarke) v Ipswich Crown Court; R (Hi) v Willesden Magistrates’ Court and CPS; DPP (Blakeley) v Manchester and Salford Magistrates’ Court; DPP (Whyte) v Manchester and Salford Magistrates’ Court; R (Usman) v Reading Magistrates’ Court; R v Wilson, Walmsley, York & Senior; DPP (Bhusal) v Walsall Magistrates’ Court; DPP (Thaiss) v Lincoln Magistrates’ Court
- 4. Charges
- Thomson v Knights; Jones v Thomas (John Barrie); DPP v Gane; R v Chichester Magistrates’ Court ex p DPP; Butterworth v DPP; R v Bolton JJ ex p Khan (Zafer Alli); DPP (R) v Short; R v Phipps; Crann v CPS
- 5. Costs
- Ho-Shing v CPS
- 6. Disqualification from Driving
- George v DPP; R v Loughborough JJ ex p Smith (Steven); Shaw v DPP and Other Cases; Crampsie v DPP; R (Cawley) v Warrington Crown Court
- 7. Equivocal Plea
- Ankrah v DPP
- 8. Proof of Driving
- Patterson v Charlton; DPP v Williams (Charles Anthony); Brown v Stott (Procurator Fiscal, Dunfermline) and Another; Huntley v DPP; Jones (Vivian Mary) v DPP; Premananthan v CPS
- 9. Legal Aid
- R v Richmond Magistrates’ Court ex p Gawel; R v Gravesham Magistrates’ Court ex p Baker; R v Slough Magistrates’ Court ex p Noble; R v Cheshire JJ ex p Rolt; R (Matara) v Brent Magistrates’ Court; R v Dean Thomas
- 10. The Magistrates
- Owen v Jones; R v Downham Market Magistrates’ Court ex p Nudd; DPP v Quinn; R v Highbury Corner Magistrates’ Court ex p Tann; Huchard v DPP; R v Newcastle upon Tyne Magistrates’ Court ex p Currie; R v Chelmsford Magistrates’ Court ex p Hammond
- 11. Re-opening the Case
- MacDonald v Skelt; R v Aylesbury Crown Court ex p Lait; Jolly (Christopher) v DPP; R v Cook ex p DPP; Steward v DPP; Khatibi v DPP; Malcolm v DPP
- 12. Reckless Driving ;
- Hand v DPP
- 13. Stay of Proceedings and Abuse of Process
- R v Bishop’s Stortford JJ ex p DPP; DPP v Edgar;DPP v Garrety; R (Bozkurt) v Thames Magistrates’ Court; R v Boyd; Hoar-Stevens v Richmond Magistrates’ Court; Christopher Boucher, Interested Party; DPP v Meakin; Ivic v DPP; Murphy (Gerard) v DPP; Roberts v DPP; Morris v DPP; DPP v Spalluto
- 14. Verdicts
- Macphail v DPP; DPP v Chajed; R v Roberts (Samantha Ann)
- 15. Perverting the Course of Justice by Avoiding Detection
- R v Clark (Mark)
- APPENDICES
- Road Traffic Act 1988, sections 3A to 11
- Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988, sections 15, 16, 34, 35
- Index