References: [2017] EWHC 3719 (Admin)
Links: Bailii
Ratio: Prosecutions brought against motorists in unconnected circumstances for driving a motor vehicle on a road or other public place after consuming so much alcohol that the proportion if it in their respective breath exceeded the prescribed limit, contrary to s. 5 of the Road Traffic Act 1988. The same defence solicitors have appeared and, in both cases, defence statements have been served which deny the consumption of sufficient alcohol to give rise to a positive reading and challenge the reliability of the Lion Intoxilyzer device used in the procedure. Pursuant to these statements, applications have been made under s. 8 of the 1996 Act for comprehensive documentation concerning the relevant device, relying on expert evidence to the effect that there must have been some defect in the device: the evidence proceeds on the unstated premise that what is said by each of the motorists as to their alcohol consumption is accurate.
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Last Update: 06 March 2019
Ref: 619950
The post Director of Public Prosecutions v Manchester and Salford Magistrates’ Court: Admn 7 Jul 2017 appeared first on swarb.co.uk.