R v OFM

R v OFM

It is open to a jury to conclude that starting the engine of a car, even while standing outside and without intent to move the vehicle, can amount to 'driving' if that act causes the car to move and the person has control over a principal vehicle function. The judge erred in withdrawing the case from the jury.

Parties
Prosecution: THE KING; Respondent: OFM
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 May 2026
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against a Ruling of No Case to Answer Before Trial
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Definition of Driving, Causation in Dangerous Driving, No Case to Answer Submission
Criminal Law Road Traffic Law Definition of Driving Causation in Dangerous Driving No Case to Answer Submission

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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

THE KING

Prosecution

OFM

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against a Ruling of No Case to Answer Before Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether starting a car engine while standing outside amounts to 'driving' under the Road Traffic Act 1988
  2. 2 Whether there was sufficient evidence for a jury to conclude the respondent was driving

Ratio Decidendi

It is open to a jury to conclude that starting the engine of a car, even while standing outside and without intent to move the vehicle, can amount to 'driving' if that act causes the car to move and the person has control over a principal vehicle function. The judge erred in withdrawing the case from the jury.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Leave to appeal granted
  • Appeal allowed