QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
B e f o r e :
MR JUSTICE MITTING
|BRADFORD CROWN COURT||(DEFENDANT)|
|DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS||(INTERESTED PARTY)|
Smith Bernal Wordwave Limited
190 Fleet Street London EC4A 2AG
Tel No: 020 7404 1400 Fax No: 020 7831 8838
(Official Shorthand Writers to the Court)
MR CHRIS SMITH (instructed by Jessica Hetherington) appeared on behalf of the INTERESTED PARTY
Crown Copyright ©
"A constable must, on requiring any person to provide a specimen in pursuance of this section, warn him that a failure to provide it may render him liable to prosecution."
"The question of non-compliance with section 7(7) ... was raised for the first time at the very end of the closing submissions made on behalf of the appellant. It was and still is the view of the court that such an issue should have been raised during the course of the evidence itself when the respondent would have had a full opportunity to address the matter."
"The point about the lack of notice was taken at the very end of closing submissions. There was no opportunity for the Crown to deal with it effectively. It seemed to us that this was a deliberate ambush tactic, and to give it any regard would be to condone an abuse of process of the court. The tactic was characteristic of the manner in which the case was conducted throughout."
"... the solicitor remained silent until after the prosecution had closed its case, it appears to me that this case has nothing at all in common with the decision of this court in R v Aylesbury Crown Court, ex parte Lait  EWHC (Admin) 319, where the prosecution was bound to adduce the evidence on which it relied before it closed its case, pursuant to the requirements of section 69 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act."
"... if at the close of the prosecution case the defence is of the view that the evidence called on behalf of the prosecution does not disclose a prima facie case, then the defence should, in general, make that submission at the end of the prosecution case ... But what seems to me quite indefensible is the submission by Mr Ley that the defence can, by reserving the submission until after the close of the defence case, put itself in a stronger position than it would have been had it made the submission earlier on. That seems to me to encourage a totally wrong approach to the administration of justice."
"Member States shall adopt the necessary measures to ensure that the parties involved in a road traffic accident are able to ascertain promptly the identity of the insurance undertaking covering the liability arising out of the use of any motor vehicle involved in the accident."