AG -v- Gregory [2008] JRC 089 (04 June 2008)

AG -v- Gregory [2008] JRC 089 (04 June 2008)

Article 21(5) of the Road Traffic (Jersey) Law 1956 does not require a police officer to form an independent opinion of excessive speed before activating a speed detection device; conviction can be based solely on factual evidence from such devices if properly operated.

Citation
[2008] JRC 089
Parties
Appellant: Attorney General; Respondent: Mr Gregory
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
04 June 2008
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal by Way of Case Stated
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Speeding Offences, Statutory Interpretation, Evidence Admissibility
Criminal Law Road Traffic Law Speeding Offences Statutory Interpretation Evidence Admissibility

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Attorney General

Appellant

Mr Gregory

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal by Way of Case Stated

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Article 21(5) of the Road Traffic (Jersey) Law 1956 requires a police officer to form an independent opinion of excessive speed before activating a speed detection device
  2. 2 Whether conviction for speeding can be based solely on evidence from a speed detection device

Ratio Decidendi

Article 21(5) of the Road Traffic (Jersey) Law 1956 does not require a police officer to form an independent opinion of excessive speed before activating a speed detection device; conviction can be based solely on factual evidence from such devices if properly operated.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • Verdict of guilty recorded against the respondent
  • Case remitted to Magistrate's Court for sentencing in the ordinary way