DPP v Janman

DPP v Janman

A person supervising a learner driver is in charge of the vehicle under section 5(1)(b) regardless of statutory qualification, and the facts did not establish that there was no likelihood of the supervisor driving; thus, the section 5(2) defence did not succeed and a conviction should follow.

Parties
Claimant: DPP; Defendant: Janman
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 January 2004
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal (case Stated) / Divisional Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; case remitted with direction to convict.
Legal Topics
In Charge of Motor Vehicle, Supervising Learner Driver, Drink Driving, Section 5 Road Traffic Act 1988, Defence Under Section 5(2)
Criminal Law Road Traffic Law In Charge of Motor Vehicle Supervising Learner Driver Drink Driving Section 5 Road Traffic Act 1988 Defence Under Section 5(2)

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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

DPP

Claimant

Janman

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal (case Stated) / Divisional Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a person supervising a learner driver is 'in charge' of the motor vehicle under section 5(1)(b) of the Road Traffic Act 1988
  2. 2 Whether the prosecution must prove the supervisor is statutorily qualified
  3. 3 Whether the defence under section 5(2) (no likelihood of driving) was available to the supervisor in the circumstances

Ratio Decidendi

A person supervising a learner driver is in charge of the vehicle under section 5(1)(b) regardless of statutory qualification, and the facts did not establish that there was no likelihood of the supervisor driving; thus, the section 5(2) defence did not succeed and a conviction should follow.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; case remitted with direction to convict.

Orders

  • Case remitted to justices with direction to convict the respondent.