Director of Public Prosecutions v Milton

Director of Public Prosecutions v Milton

The district judge erred in law by importing a subjective element into the test for dangerous driving and by failing to take into account relevant matters, including the effect on other road users and the context of the driving. The acquittal was based on an incorrect application of the law and improper reliance on inadmissible opinion evidence. The matter must be remitted for rehearing before a differently constituted tribunal.

Parties
Claimant: Director of Public Prosecutions; Defendant: Mark Scott Milton
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 February 2006
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal (case Stated) / Appeal From Magistrates' Court to High Court (divisional Court)
Outcome
appeal allowed; acquittal quashed; matter remitted for rehearing
Legal Topics
Dangerous Driving, Speeding Offences, Police Exemption Under Road Traffic Regulation Act, Objective Test for Dangerous Driving, Case Stated Procedure
Criminal Law Road Traffic Law Dangerous Driving Speeding Offences Police Exemption Under Road Traffic Regulation Act Objective Test for Dangerous Driving Case Stated Procedure

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 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Director of Public Prosecutions

Claimant

Mark Scott Milton

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal (case Stated) / Appeal From Magistrates' Court to High Court (divisional Court)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the district judge erred in law by taking into account the driving skills of the defendant when considering dangerous driving under the Road Traffic Act 1988
  2. 2 Whether honing advanced driving skills or acting on discretion amounts to a defence to dangerous driving
  3. 3 Whether the district judge failed to consider relevant matters or relied on irrelevant matters in acquitting the defendant

Ratio Decidendi

The district judge erred in law by importing a subjective element into the test for dangerous driving and by failing to take into account relevant matters, including the effect on other road users and the context of the driving. The acquittal was based on an incorrect application of the law and improper reliance on inadmissible opinion evidence. The matter must be remitted for rehearing before a differently constituted tribunal.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed; acquittal quashed; matter remitted for rehearing

Orders

  • The matter is remitted to the Ludlow Magistrates' Court for rehearing by a differently constituted tribunal.
  • No order as to costs.