Free Traffic Legal Advice
General discussion => The Flame Pit => Topic started by: roythebus on December 12, 2024, 08:52:59 pm
-
Thanks again. 8)
-
Ok thanks.
To explain further, what you quoted provides that breach of regulations is an offence. The details of the offence are set out in the regulations (currently Reg 110 of the Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations).
-
Ok thanks.
-
It’s not even the wording of the offence though Roy.
-
My point being a light-hearted pedantic look at what the wording actually is. There was a light-hearted exchange between myself and NJ on this point a few weeks ago. We all know how wording matters with regard to PCNs, parking tickets and the like. I know the 2 key factor are using a mobile device and driving, but maybe someone may need to use the correct wording.
Apologies if my comment upset anyone, no offence intended.
-
[N.B. For the avoidance of any doubt, this post was intended as a response to Roy's someone confused assertions, not to SP's post which mine crossed]
With the greatest respect to NJ, as far as I am aware he is not a lawyer, and you definitely aren't.
Neither am I, for that matter in the conventional sense, but I digress.
NJ seems to have a far better understanding of the law than the average man in the street. I do not know which street you are in and will therefore refrain from making further comparisons.
The way that criminal offences are created in statute is that there is a detailed provision setting out what a person must or must not do in a particular situation, and a separate provision, sometimes within the same section, and sometimes in a different Act, making it an offence not to comply with the first provision.
The provision you quoted creates the offence of doing whatever Reg. 110 say you mustn't. Unless there is some ambiguity regarding Parliament's intention from the language of Reg. 110, and unless the wording of the provision creating the offence clarifies that intention, it is all but meaningless in determining the finer details of what activities are being prohibited.
This is not BODMAS in maths , where the order of operations can be critical. If Reg 110 prohibits using a hand held mobile telephone while driving, all 3 elements must be present for the offence to be complete. It matters not one jot whether you refer to it as driving while using a hand held mobile phone, or using a hand-held mobile phone while driving.
-
What’s your point Roy?
-
Use of mobile phone whilst driving, so much mention of it on here, here is the exact wording of statute law:41DBreach of requirements as to control of vehicle, mobile telephones etc.
A person who contravenes or fails to comply with a construction and use requirement—
(a)as to not driving a motor vehicle in a position which does not give proper control or a full view of the road and traffic ahead, or not causing or permitting the driving of a motor vehicle by another person in such a position, or
(b)as to not driving or supervising the driving of a motor vehicle while using a hand-held mobile telephone or other hand-held interactive communication device, or not causing or permitting the driving of a motor vehicle by another person using such a telephone or other device,
is guilty of an offence.]
It is contrary to popular belief that you can't use a mobile phone whilst driving; quite the contrary to be very pedantic, you must not drive whilst using a mobile device. NewJudge and I exchanged swords on this point a few weeks ago. :)