Rank: Guest 
|
Posted By John Battye
is anyone aware of any prosecutions or civil cases where a third party has been held to account for supplying alcohol to a driver (e.g a pub landlord) or a manager/relative/friend etc failing to prevent a drunk driver getting behind the steering wheel etc
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Ken Dickson
John,
Firstly you need to draw a clear distinction between “failing to prevent” and “aiding and abetting” or “inciting”.
Failing to prevent someone committing a crime, is not in itself a crime. A pub landlord, relative, or friend would not be guilty of supplying alcohol to someone who then commits a drink driving offence any more than a supermarket would be for supplying the alcohol.
If an individual assists in the commission of the offence, or incites the offence, then that in itself would be a distinct offence. But you would not have incited or assisted a drink driving offence simply by providing the alcohol.
As basic examples…
If you loan a car to someone under the influence of alcohol, you would expect them to drive it, therefore you have assisted in the offence. Providing a car for a drunken person to use is not the same as providing alcohol to some with a car and who may use the car.
If you ask someone who is under the influence of alcohol to drive you somewhere you have incited that person to drive and commit the drink-driving offence. Inciting any illegal act is an offence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By John Battye
ken
thank you for raising these distinct areas, this is also very helpfull.
There was a case in France about a year ago where a guest at a dinner party drove home drunk, crashed & killed someone. The hosts of the party were put on trial for (the French equivalent of) manslaughter. Though they were acquitted, legal experts are of the opinion that it is only as matter of time before such cases become successful, including the prosecution of pub landlords
The more important point I am trying to get to grips with is, how much can a health & safety expert walk past a problem (not on his patch or workplace) and say that's not his /her concern. - This seems to be the case with Local Authority building Control surveyors
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Ken Dickson
John,
We must not compare UK and French law. You may also recall that prosecutions were considered against those who failed to stop and render assistance at the crash involving Princess Diana. They did commit an offence under French law, but the same would not be considered in the UK.
Can’t comment on LA Building Control Surveyors. If they have any sense they would simply make a mental note of the observation and action it when back in the office. As a “Safety Professional” I walked past a partially collapsed scaffolding, caused by high wind, and pointed out to the Bobby, who was doing a fine job of keeping the public away while the contractor made the scaffolding safe, that (1) they may be destroying evidence for a criminal prosecution, and that (2) there is a legal obligation to notify the HSE of the collapse. He didn’t take it very well, probably cause the law is his job.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Merv Newman
In France a bar owner has been successfully prosecuted for serving additional drinks to a drunk person who later killed a pedestrian with his car.
UK and French law are enormously different but I could see a "contributory negligence" charge as being reasonable in the UK.
On the scaffolding/bobby incident, it is much harder to pronounce. Normally we would like photos to be taken of the "as is" state of the collapsed scaff. But the person taking the photos would need some expertise in scaff techniques. Not your average Bobbie. Nor me either.
The person or company "making safe" might just be interested in concealing evidence.
Tricky.
I think I'll go for the "cop cam", a video camera mounted on the helmet of a police man. Even random, inexpert images can be analysed by experts after the event to detect point failures. Or whatever.
?
Merv
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Ken Dickson
“In France a bar owner has been successfully prosecuted for serving additional drinks to a drunk person who later killed a pedestrian with his car.”
Interesting that. Of course in the UK the bar owner would have committed an offence by simply serving a drunk person, and his customer would have committed an offence simply by being intoxicated on licensed premises.
Ken
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Clare Gabriel
You must be aware that the British law defines the person who gets behind the wheel of the vehicle as the person responsible. That duty cannot be blamed on another - even where drinks have been spiked it has not been sufficient defence as the driver has to demonstrate a duty of care to watch their drinks.
In our court we recently had a situation where an aged gentleman, a teetotaller was invited to supper of a friend. He was drinking ginger wine thinking it was ginger ale. He was subsequently caught drink driving and this was put up as defence. The CPS put forward the case the individual has the duty to ensure they are aware of what they are drinking before they get into a vehicle. It was proven and he was banned (minimum 12 months depending on how much you blow or in urine or blood)
There is case law on this but am not adept enough to know what it is - but you can look at it in the RTA.
Suffice to say British law - unless you manage to get hold of that infamous barrister who seems to get everyone off traffic offences - puts the duty of care on the driver.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Ken Dickson
We should remember this is not about alcohol consumption, it is about a blood/alcohol level over 80mg/L. It is also not about drivers having a debatable duty of care, it is about criminal responsibility.
If you could prove some unique metabolic process that caused that 1/4lb of grapes you’ve just eaten to be converted to alcohol inside YOUR body (sufficient to be over the limit), you just MIGHT be able put forward a fairly thin defence. And even then, only if you didn’t already know how unique you are. But the well tried “sorry Guv’, I didn’t know I was drunk” is never going to win any friends in court, and neither is “they bought me the drinks, I didn’t want them, but it would have been rude to leave them”.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.