Ruban v Att. Gen. (No. 2) [1987] JLR 220 (10 August 1987)

Ruban v Att. Gen. (No. 2) [1987] JLR 220 (10 August 1987)

The court held that the obligation to 'stop' under the relevant law means the driver must remain at a standstill for a reasonable time, not just momentarily halt.

Citation
[1987] JLR 220
Parties
Applicant: Ruban; Respondent: Attorney General
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
10 August 1987
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Failure to Stop, Interpretation of 'stop' Under Road Traffic (jersey) Law 1956
Criminal Law Road Traffic Law Failure to Stop Interpretation of 'stop' Under Road Traffic (jersey) Law 1956

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 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ruban

Applicant

Attorney General

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the meaning of 'stop' under Road Traffic (Jersey) Law, 1956, art. 26(1)?
  2. 2 What is the extent of the driver's obligation when required to stop?

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the obligation to 'stop' under the relevant law means the driver must remain at a standstill for a reasonable time, not just momentarily halt.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed