DPP v Janman [2004] EWHC 101 (Admin) (22 January 2004)
A person supervising a learner driver is in charge of the vehicle for the purposes of section 5(1)(b) regardless of statutory qualification, and the defence under section 5(2) was not established on the facts as the statutory purpose of supervision implies a likelihood of driving.
- Citation
- [2004] EWHC 101 (Admin)
- Parties
- Claimant: DPP; Defendant: Janman
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 22 January 2004
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal by Way of Case Stated / High Court, Queen's Bench Division, Divisional Court
- Outcome
- appeal allowed
- Legal Topics
- Supervision of Learner Drivers, Driving Under Influence, 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.
Parties
DPP
Claimant
Janman
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Appeal by Way of Case Stated / High Court, Queen's Bench Division, Divisional Court
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether a supervisor of a learner driver is 'in charge' under section 5(1)(b) Road Traffic Act 1988
- 2 Whether the defence under section 5(2) is available to a supervisor who claims no likelihood of driving
- 3 Whether statutory qualification to supervise is required for 'in charge' status
Ratio Decidendi
A person supervising a learner driver is in charge of the vehicle for the purposes of section 5(1)(b) regardless of statutory qualification, and the defence under section 5(2) was not established on the facts as the statutory purpose of supervision implies a likelihood of driving.
Court Disposition
appeal allowed
Orders
- case remitted to justices with direction to convict
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment