R v D (Chester Crown Court)

Instructed in this appeal against conviction case - failing to give driver details. Client had previously represented himself and been found guilty. Conviction overturned on appeal.

 

R v A (Uxbridge Magistrates Court)

Instructed in this speeding case. Client accused of driving at 113 mph in his Ferrari. Case defended on the basis that proceedings were not instituted properly by Metropolitan Police - using the Single Justice Procedure Notice. Representations made to the Crown Prosecution Service London Traffic Unit who discontinued proceedings prior to trial.

 

R v P (Burnley Magistrates Court)

Instructed in this failing to give driver details case. Case defended to trial in front of a District Judge. Not guilty verdict.

 

R v G (Bath Magistrates Court)

Instructed in this speeding case. Client accused of driving at "a constant speed of 130 mph over a distance of approximately a mile." Basis of plea agreed and accepted by the court. Licence endorsed with 6 penalty points.  No disqualification as 'exceptional hardship' was proven.

 

R v P (Exeter Magistrates Court)

Instructed in two speeding cases. Client had 9 existing penalty points. Exeter case postponed pending commencement of the other matter. Stevenage case remitted to the client's local court and both cases dealt with together on the same occasion. The court imposed 3 points for each offence but did not disqualify as it found 'exceptional hardship' was proven.

 

R v M (Banbury Magistrates Court)

Instructed in this speeding case. Client had 6 existing penalty points. Offence charged fell within the highest sentencing bracket in the guidelines - usually a ban or 6 penalty points. Client not able to argue 'exceptional hardship.'  Court persuaded to impose 5 penalty points. Client avoids 'totting up' disqualification of at least 6 months.

 

R v J (Nottingham Crown Court)

Instructed in this appeal against sentence case. Client had unsuccessfully argued against a ‘totting up’ disqualification - a repeat application. Appeal allowed on an ‘exceptional hardship’ basis where new circumstances were found to exist.

 

R v H (Chippenham Magistrates Court)

Instructed in this speeding case by a leading road transport solicitor - with expert evidence from laser expert, Dr Michael Clark. Defendant was accused of driving at 115 mph on a motorway. Basis of plea agreed on the day of trial. Licence endorsed with 4 penalty points.

 

R v F (Birmingham Magistrates Court)

Instructed at a very late stage in this drink driving case. Defendant had previously been badly advised by her solicitors. Clear advice given about her prospects of success. Change of plea, full credit given by the court.

 

R v D (Court of Appeal Criminal Division)

Death by dangerous driving. Instructed to make a renewed application for leave to appeal against sentence. Application allowed in part as the sentencing judge had purported to impose an extended driving disqualification where there was no power to do so.

 

R v M and others (Llandrindod Wells Magistrates Court)

Instructed by all four defendants. The main prosecution witness was a Chief Inspector - who described the defendants’ driving as “extremely dangerous.” Charged with contravening a double white line system. At trial, the prosecutor offered no evidence against all defendants.

 

R v T (York Crown Court)

Speeding. Appeal allowed. The court substituted 5 penalty points for 6 points imposed by the lower court. In the circumstances, the appellant was not liable for a ‘totting up’ disqualification of at least 6 months.

 

R v D (Lavender Hill Magistrates Court)

Case re-opened and adjourned for trial. Successful defence to failing to identify the driver - on the basis that it was “not reasonably practicable” to return a notice not actually received.

 

R v P and others (Wirral Magistrates Court)

Instructed by one of five defendants in this speeding case in which there was a challenge to the institution of proceedings by postal requisition and written charge. At least 15 other cases were put on hold pending the outcome of the contested cases. Two days of legal argument.

 

R v W (Chelmsford Magistrates Court)

Advised the defendant in this speeding case where it was alleged that he drove at 100-130 mph for a distance of 3 miles on the A120. 14 day disqualification.

 

R v G (Leeds Crown Court)

G was found asleep in the driver seat of his car in a multi-storey car park. Accused of being drunk in charge of a vehicle. Expert evidence called for the defence. Appeal against conviction allowed as there was no likelihood of driving whilst over the prescribed limit.

 

R v D (St Albans Magistrates Court)

D was charged with careless driving. D had not been warned about prosecution at the time of offence, but 36 hours later. The prosecutor failed to establish that the mandatory requirements of the Road Traffic Offenders Act were met and D was acquitted after trial. 

 

R v V (Peterborough Magistrates Court)

Client received a Notice of Intended Prosecution and a request for driver information. Client replied - indicating that although he was in the car, he was asleep at the time and the driver must have been his wife or son. V was prosecuted for speeding and failing to identify the driver. Successful "Hamilton defence" at trial.

 

R v Backhouse and others (York Crown Court / Court of Appeal)

Appeared on behalf of all four defendants in a three week trial at York Crown Court. All defendants were found not guilty of causing death by dangerous driving but convicted of dangerous driving. Appeared at the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) in the subsequent appeals against sentence. This case is the leading authority on the purposes of disqualification from driving; see Needham [2016] EWCA Crim 455 at paragraph 17.