|
CONTENTS
-
-
- CHAPTER 1: THE REQUIREMENT TO PROVIDE SPECIMENS
-
- The Arrest
- R v Fox, Fox v Chief Constable of Gwent; Gull v Scarborough; Hartland v Alden; DPP v Kay (John); DPP v Porter (Paul Nicholas); DPP v Robertson (Steven Gary)
-
- Random Stopping of Vehicles
- Chief Constable of Gwent v Dash; DPP v Minton
-
- Reasonable Suspicion and Reasonable Belief
- Johnson v Whitehouse; Blake v Pope; DPP v Redling; DPP v McGladrigan; Whelehan v DPP; Grant v DPP
-
- Trespass
- Morris v Beardmore; Clarke v DPP
-
- Whether Constable in the Course of an Investigation
- Graham v Albert; Pearson v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis; Hawes v DPP; R v South Norfolk JJ ex p Keymer; DPP v Earnshaw (Neil Graham)
-
- Medical Reasons why Breath Specimens Cannot be Provided or Should not be Required
- Horrocks v Binns; White & Gaskell v Proudlock; Dempsey v Catton; Davis v DPP; Davies (Gordon Edward) v DPP; Webb v DPP; Young (Paula) v DPP; Francis v DPP; Steadman v DPP
-
- Breath Analysis Device Unreliable, Unavailable, or Not Practicable to Use it
- Cotter v Kamil; Slender v Boothby; Morgan v Lee; Waite v Smith; Dye v Manns; Thompson v Thynne; Oxford v Baxendale; Chief Constable of Avon & Somerset v Kelliher; Chief Constable of Kent v Berry; Haghigat-Khou v Chambers; Stokes v Sayers; Tobi v Nicholas; Badkin v DPP; Denny v DPP; Jones (David Alan) v DPP; Dixon v Yardley; Wootton v DPP; Rathbone v DPP; Jarvis v DPP; Bobin v DPP; DPP v Smith (Robert James); Kneale v DPP
-
- Driver’s Condition Due to Some Drug
- Cole v DPP; Bell v DPP
-
- The Procedure
- DPP v Carey; Chief Constable of Avon & Somerset v Singh; DPP v Warren; Edge v DPP; Meade v DPP; Ogburn v DPP; Williams v DPP; DPP v Duffy; DPP v Nesbitt; R v Cheshire JJ ex p Cunningham and Other Cases; R v Cheshire JJ ex p Sinnott and Other Cases; DPP v Garrett; Beaufont v DPP; DPP v Palmer (Carlton Lloyd); DPP v Ward (Andrew Stuart); DPP v Jackson; Stanley v DPP; Clayton v DPP; Beatrice v DPP; DPP v Coulter
-
- Medical Reasons why a Blood Specimen Cannot or Should not be Taken
- Grix v Chief Constable of Kent; Wade v DPP; DPP v Wythe; DPP v Donnelly (Ronald Francis); DPP v Gibbons (Stuart Michael); Kinsella v DPP
-
- Hospital Patients
- Askew v DPP; Whelan v DPP; R v Burton upon Trent JJ ex p Woolley; Webber v DPP; Butler (Michael Joseph) v DPP; Whitfield v DPP; Townson v DPP
-
- Repeat Requirements and Multiple Specimens
- Blake v Bickmore; Sparrow v Bradley; Howard v Hallett; Owen v Morgan; Chief Constable of Avon & Somerset v Creech; Nugent v Ridley; Durdan v Chief Officer, Metropolitan Police; Morrison (Trevor) v DPP; Stewart (John Kimball) v DPP; Edmond v DPP
-
- Urine Specimens
- Wyllie v CPS; Barnes v Chief Constable of Durham; DPP v Taylor (Graham); DPP v Baldwin (Alistair)
-
-
- CHAPTER 2: REPLACEMENT SPECIMENS: LOWER BREATH READING NO MORE THAN 50
-
- The Duty to Put the Option
- Reeves v Enstone; DPP v Poole; Cartwright (Anthony) v DPP;Brennan v DPP; Noscoe v DPP; Baldwin (John) v DPP
-
- Information to be Given to the Driver about the Breath Analysi
- DPP v Hill-Brookes; DPP v Ormsby
-
- Dissuasion from Exercising the Option
- Carberry v Bettinson; Sharp v Spencer; Rush v DPP; Body v CPS
-
- Whether Option Exercised
- Rawlins v Brown; Hope v DPP; DPP v Charles and Other Cases; DPP v Berry; Mahoney v DPP; R on the Application of Ijaz v DPP
-
- Motorist Must Understand that a Blood Specimen will be Taken by a Doctor
- Turner v DPP; Chatelard v DPP; Fraser v DPP
-
- Medical Reasons Why Blood Cannot or Should Not Be Taken
- Johnson v West Yorkshire Metropolitan Police; Andrews v DPP; Hayes v DPP; R v Epping JJ ex p Quy; Salisbury v CPS; DPP v Joiner; Robinson (Dena) v DPP; Gorman v DPP; DPP v Arnup; DPP v Orchard; Joseph v DPP
-
- Other Issues
- Sivyer v Parker; Murray v DPP; R v DPP ex p Branagan; DPP v Memery
-
-
- CHAPTER 3: SPECIMENS FOR LABORATORY TESTING
-
- Taking and Dividing the Specimen
- Over v Musker; Perry v McGovern; Dear v DPP; R v North Sefton JJ ex p Rimmer; Butler v DPP; DPP v Elstob; DPP v Snook; Johnson (Antony Harold) v DPP; DPP v Higgins (Adam Scott); Campbell v DPP; Russell v Devine; Jones (Elaine) v CPS; O’Connell v DPP; Lidington v DPP
-
- Analysis Techniques and Procedures
- Lomas v Bowler; Sophocleous v Ringer; Stephenson v Clift; R v Bolton Magistrates’ Court ex p Scally and Other Cases; Stevens v DPP; Gregory v DPP; Byrne (Simon David) v DPP; Dhaliwal v DPP
-
- Police Erroneously Notifying Defendant that no Further Action would be Taken
- Mokhra v DPP
-
- The 6 mg Allowance
- Walker v Hodgins; Oswald v DPP; DPP v Perkins; DPP v Welsh (Eric Thomas)
-
- Back-Calculation
- Gumbley v Cunningham; Benham v DPP
-
- Certificates
- Anderton v Kinnard; Penman v Parker; Hawkins v DPP; Ramsey (Jennifer) v DPP; Louis v DPP; Whyte v DPP; Wooldridge v DPP; DPP v Stephens
-
- The Provenance of the Specimen
- Tremlett v Fawcett; Gregson v DPP; McGinty v DPP; Rawal (Sushil) v DPP Mills v DPP
-
-
- CHAPTER 4: FAILING TO PROVIDE SPECIMENS
-
- The Nature of the Refusal
- DPP v Shuker; Smith v Hand; Campbell v DPP; Smyth v DPP;Hingley-Smith v DPP; DPP v Lawrence (Scott James); May v DPP; DPP v Swan
-
- The Sufficiency of the Specimen
- Anderton v Waring; DPP v Heywood; Chand v DPP; DPP v Chand
-
- Single Specimen Provided
- Stepniewski v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis; Oldfield v Anderton; Denneny v Harding; DPP v Byrne (David Stephen); DPP v Thomas (Elwyn Kenneth); DPP v Radford
-
- Time for Providing Specimen
- Patel v DPP; Cosgrove v DPP; Walters (Julian) v DPP; Oberoi (Yash) v DPP; Robertson (Eric) v DPP
-
- Whether Requirement Made
- Maudling v DPP; Burke v DPP; Cawley (Stephen) v DPP
-
- Whether Requirement Made under Section 6 or Section 7
- DPP v Karamouzis
-
-
- CHAPTER 5: REASONABLE EXCUSE FOR FAILING TO PROVIDE
-
- Conditional Agreement
- Grennan v Wescott; Francis v Chief Constable of Avon and Somerset; DPP v Billington; Chappell v DPP; DPP v Rumble; Corywright v East; DPP v Verity; DPP v Skinner; DPP v Cornell; DPP v Whalley; Salter v Chief Constable of Wiltshire; DPP v Kirk; DPP v Smith (Alan Robert); DPP v Varley; DPP v Noe
-
- Medical Reasons
- R v Lennard; Woolman v Lenton; DPP v Boden; DPP v Judge;DPP v Daley; DPP v Curtis; DPP v Szarzynski; DPP v Crofton; DPP v Hammond; DPP v Furby; Falzarano v DPP; DPP v Lonsdale; McMahon v CPS; Martiner v DPP; DPP v Mukandiwa; Pattison v DPP; Oladimeji v DPP
-
- “Trying Hard”
- Grady v Pollard; DPP v Eddowes; DPP v Ambrose; DPP v Comber; DPP v Simpson (Ian William)
-
- Other Grounds for Arguing Reasonable Excuse
- Beck v Sager; McGrath v Vipas; Dawes v Taylor; Spalding v Paine; Foster v Bentley; Kemp v Chief Constable of Kent; Chief Constable of Avon & Somerset v O’Brien; DPP v Fountain; Neale v DPP; Smith (Nicholas Paul) v DPP; Dickinson v DPP; DPP v Beech; DPP v Pearman; De Freitas v DPP; DPP v Brodzky; DPP v Coyle; DPP v Meller; DPP v Grundy
-
-
- CHAPTER 6: CHALLENGING THE BREATH TESTING AND BREATH ANALYSIS DEVICES
-
- Approval of the Device
- Bentley v Northumbria Police; Hayward v Eames; Kirkpatrick v Harrigan; Chief Constable of Northumbria v Browne; Young v Flint; Criminal Proceedings Against Lemmens; Richardson v DPP; Kemsley v DPP; Skinner v DPP; Wright (Andrew James) v DPP
-
- The Amount Said to Have Been Consumed
- Cracknell v Willis; Lafferty v DPP; R v CPS ex p Spurrier; Williams (John Robert) v DPP
-
- Calibration
- R v Kingston upon Thames JJ ex p Khanna; Mayon v DPP; DPP v Parkin; DPP v Deveney; DPP v Schon; Dunwoodie v DPP; Derham v DPP; Melia v DPP; Gibson v DPP; Mercer v DPP; Haggis v DPP
-
- Data Corruption
- R v Ealing JJ ex p Wheeler
-
- The Date and Time
- Fawcett v Gasparics; Parker v DPP; DPP v McKeown, DPP v Jones (Christopher); DPP v Bateson
-
- Mobile Telephones and Radios
- Scheiner v DPP
-
- Mouth Alcohol
- DPP v Browne; DPP v Teixeira; O’Sullivan v DPP
-
- Positive Breath Analysis Followed by Negative Screening Test
- Snelson v Thompson; Parish v CPS
-
- The Printout
- Burditt v Roberts; Reid (Sheena) v DPP; DPP v Barber (David Anthony)
-
- Variations Between Results
- R v Coomaraswamy; Lloyd v Morris; Gordon v Thorpe; Newton v Woods; Maharaj v Solomon; Lodge v Chief Constable of Manchester; R v Vale of Glamorgan JJ ex p Britton; O’Sullivan (Sarah) v DPP
-
-
- CHAPTER 7: THE ASSUMPTION THAT THE PROPORTION OF ALCOHOL AT THE TIME OF THE OFFENCE WAS NOT LESS THAN IN THE SEPCIMEN
-
- The Statutory Assumption
- Mitchell v Ariyo; Beauchamp-Thompson v DPP; DPP v Williams; Millard v DPP; DPP v Hill; R v Wells Street JJ ex p Hobbs; Parker (Lee Christopher) v DPP; Griffiths (Richard Stephen) v DPP
-
- Consuming Alcohol After Ceasing to Drive
- Thynne v Hindle; R v Newcastle upon Tyne JJ ex p Hindle; Dawson v Lunn; Lloyd v Knight; Rynsard v Spalding; Oxford v Fairhurst; DPP v Singh; DPP v Lowden; DPP v Sangha; DPP v Ward (Kevin William); R v Drummond; Lonergan v DPP; DPP v Chambers; DPP v Ellery
-
-
- CHAPTER 8; EVIDENCE
-
- The Printout
- Gaimster v Marlow; Chief Constable of Surrey v Wickens; Walton v Rimmer; Teape v Godfrey; R v Tower Bridge Magistrates’ Court ex p DPP; Hasler v DPP; Leeson v Haringey JJ and DPP; McCormack v DPP; Jubb v DPP
-
- Admissibility of the Breath Analysis
- Archbold v Jones; Sykes v DPP; Yhnell v DPP; Smith (Dennis Edward) v DPP; McLellan v DPP; Prince v CPS; Hague v DPP; Evans (Cyril) v DPP; Slasor v DPP; Willicott v DPP
-
- The Record of the Procedure
- Bermudez v Chief Constable of Avon and Somerset; R v Pydar JJ ex p Foster; Williams v DPP
-
- The Discretion to Admit or Exclude Evidence: Unfairness
- Hammond v Hunter; McGrath v Field; Discombe v DPP; DPP v Godwin; Hudson v DPP; Daniels v DPP; Brown (Kevin Mark) v DPP; Worsley v DPP; McShane v DPP; DPP v Ward (Jack Evan); DPP v MacPhail; O’Connell v DPP; Prouse v DPP; Ortega v DPP; Porceddu v DPP; Harper v DPP; Davis (Karl) v DPP; DPP v Davies; R on the Application of the DPP v Evans (Brychan Gethin John); DPP v Preston; Watson v DPP; DPP v Kennedy; R on the Application of Forde v DPP; DPP v Carless; R on the Application of Marsh (Ian) v DPP
-
- Delay and the Right to Defend Oneself
- Campbell v DPP; Kennedy v CPS; Myles v DPP; Kirkup v CPS; Whitley v DPP; CPS v Rice; Causey v DPP
-
- Mala Fides
- Matto v Wolverhampton Crown Court; Thomas (Frank George) v DPP; DPP v Wilson; Ogden v DPP; Sharpe v DPP; Braham v DPP; DPP v Corthine
-
- Oral Evidence
- Culleton v Palmer; Owen v Chesters; Chief Constable of Kent v Ellis; Mace v Dean; Will v DPP; Thom v DPP; Greenaway v DPP; Van Flute v DPP; Perkins v DPP; Leong v DPP
-
- Evidence of Unfitness to Drive
- Leetham v DPP; Hurst v DPP
- Witness Summonses and Disclosure 369
- R v Coventry Magistrates’ Court ex p Perks; R v Skegness Magistrates’ Court ex p Cardy; R v Manchester Crown Court ex p Williams; R v Teesside JJ ex p Payne; R v Kingston-upon-Hull JJ ex p Walton; R v Pirehill North JJ ex p Stoddard;
- R v Tower Bridge Magistrates’ Court ex p DPP; Fearnley v DPP; DPP v Wood; DPP v McGillicuddy; R on the Application of Cunliffe v West London Magistrates’ Court, v Ealing Magistrates’ Court, v Hastings Magistrates’ Court
-
- Advance Notice of Expert Evidence
- Callander v DPP
-
- CHAPTER 9: DEFINITIONS
-
- “Attempting to Drive”
- Elkarib v DPP
-
- “Breath”
- Zafar v DPP; Woolfe v DPP
-
- “Consuming”
- DPP v Johnson (David)
-
- “Conviction”
- DPP v Haddigan
-
- “Driving”
- R v MacDonagh; Rowan v Chief Constable of the Merseyside Police; McKoen v Ellis; Gunnell v DPP; DPP v Alderton
-
- “Drug”
- Bradford v Wilson; R v Ealing Magistrates’ Court ex p Woodman
-
- “In Charge”
- DPP v Webb; DPP v Watkins; DPP v Janman; CPS v Bate
- “Interview” 399
- CPS v O’Shea; DPP v Rous and Davis; R on the Application of Ridehalgh v DPP; Sneyd v DPP
-
- “Public Place”
- Bowman v DPP; DPP v Vivier; DPP v Coulman; Edwards v DPP; R v Colchester JJ ex p Wood; Robinson v DPP; Taussik v DPP; Planton v DPP; R on the Application of Lewis v DPP
-
- “Road”
- Lang v Hindhaugh; Brewer v DPP; R on the Application of Dunmill v DPP
-
-
- CHAPTER 10: DEFENCES
-
- Autrefois Acquit
- Broadbent v High; DPP v Porthouse; R v Truro & South Powder JJ ex p McCullagh; Williams (Alan Davies) v DPP
-
- Duress/Necessity
- DPP v Jones (David Alan); DPP v Bell (Derek); DPP v Davis; DPP v Pittaway; DPP v Rogers; DPP v Tomkinson; DPP v Hicks
-
- Insanity
- R v Birmingham JJ ex p Jacobs; DPP v Harper
-
- No Likelihood of Driving
- DPP v Frost; Drake v DPP; Sheldrake v DPP
- Premature Disclosure of Defence 431
|
