DPP v Dukolli

DPP v Dukolli

In the absence of medical or scientific evidence, the magistrates were wrong to find that the defendant had discharged the burden of proof that post-driving alcohol consumption explained the excess reading; such evidence is required except in obvious cases.

Parties
Claimant: DPP; Defendant: Azem Dukolli
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 October 2009
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Divisional Court Appeal From Magistrates' Court Acquittal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; acquittal quashed; case remitted to magistrates with direction to convict.
Legal Topics
Driving With Excess Alcohol, Hip Flask Defence, Burden of Proof, Post Driving Alcohol Consumption
Criminal Law Road Traffic Law Driving With Excess Alcohol Hip Flask Defence Burden of Proof Post Driving Alcohol Consumption

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

DPP

Claimant

Azem Dukolli

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Divisional Court Appeal From Magistrates' Court Acquittal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant discharged the burden of proof under Section 15.3 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 without scientific evidence
  2. 2 Whether magistrates can find the statutory assumption in Section 15.2 displaced without expert evidence

Ratio Decidendi

In the absence of medical or scientific evidence, the magistrates were wrong to find that the defendant had discharged the burden of proof that post-driving alcohol consumption explained the excess reading; such evidence is required except in obvious cases.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; acquittal quashed; case remitted to magistrates with direction to convict.

Orders

  • Order for costs in favour of the prosecution, conditional on the respondent not being legally aided.