IIRC, it’s a common law presumption, so statute would need to intervene (again) to displace it. It’s likely that it would only do so in respect of criminal offences, so it probably wouldn’t affect decriminalised enforcement. They might even exempt cameras altogether.
It is a common law presumption, but reporting of such matters is very often only partially accurate, but it's pretty clear that the subject is statutory intervention. It'll be interesting to see what they come up with.
The presumption that a device is working correctly all the time is like getting an MoT on your var, it's only valid the moment the certificate is written out. Your headlamp could fail the moment your car moves off the test lane. It even says so on the bit of paper.
The presumption that a device is working correctly all the time is like getting an MoT on your var, it's only valid the moment the certificate is written out. Your headlamp could fail the moment your car moves off the test lane. It even says so on the bit of paper.
The presumption has nothing to do with any certificate, indeed most devices (phones, watches, lifts, laptops, routers, GPS satellites...) do not have any certificate whatsoever, so I'm not sure your analogy works?