Blues and Twos and Traffic Lights

Topics relating to Advanced Driving in cars
User avatar
akirk
Posts: 1659
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 6:58 pm
Location: Bristol

Re: Blues and Twos and Traffic Lights

Postby akirk » Mon Sep 19, 2016 4:46 pm

I think here is a lot of confusion here, there are roughly speaking 4 types of law in our country:
- common law (case law basically - i.e. Law formed by previous judgements)
- equity law (historically court of chancery now basically rolled in with common law)
- ecclesiastical law (Church of England has its own law)
- statutory law (that which most of the public think of as law)

Ecclesiastical law is irrelevant unless the lights were in a church :)
Equity law is an irrelevant distinction now as there is no longer a split between being able to issue injunctive or financial relief - i.e. While there can be differences in some cases, the same courts can now deal with both and within one case if necessary...

So that leaves statutory (put on the statute books by parliament) and common law (created by the courts as case law)

To decide what the answer is you have to look at statutory law and then case law, looking for case law having refined / clarified statutory law, or having created law in the absence of pertinent statutory law...

For this example statutory law states that you have to obey a Constable engaged in the regulation of traffic.

Statutory law does not require you to obey a constable not regulating traffic (i.e. in a car behind you)

So the question then comes down to whether any case law now requires that, and I am not aware of any... if you can identify the cases where such law was created, it will be interesting to see them... esp. as you are arguing case law not only extending the law regarding when a constable can give instruction (feasible) but also contravening the law which requires you to observe the red light...

So if mounting a defence in court you either need to show statutory law to support your choice (not possible as a constable can not be regulating traffic from a car behind you), or show case law where a formal judgement has been laid down which extends the law to allow for this scenario... not cases where someone is not prosecuted, but where he judgement changes the law... if that exists then you are correct,if it doesn't then you are incorrect :D

I don't know of any such case law, which suggests that you would / could be prosecuted for crossing the red light in the scenario discussed, but I am happy to learn...

Alasdair

Rolyan
Posts: 660
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2016 5:45 pm

Re: Blues and Twos and Traffic Lights

Postby Rolyan » Mon Sep 19, 2016 4:48 pm

dvenman wrote:
mainbeam wrote:how the common law is applied.


But any prosecution wouldn't happen under common law, would it.

I do grant you there's a distinction in this whole 8 page discussion between common *sense* and the law as it stands. But if a police officer in a car behind me thinks, after I've applied some common sense and made a decision, that I'll break the law to facilitate his progress if I think I'm going to end up with a fine and points, then they're probably up for a refresher course.

Correct, as confirmed by the police driver on page 1 this thread.

I would suggest to you that there is little point in trying to persuade Mainbeam to change his beliefs. He believes he is correct, which is fair enough, we all do.

So accepting tha we all have an opinion, we need a way of sifting through the opinions. We either know the law because of our own situation, or we need to rely on other people expert knowledge (the Police and Courts for law, Doctors for health, Bikers for how to cross unbroken white lines etc.) and then make a judgement call. So here goes....

On the question of "can I be prosecuted for passing through a stop line and red light, or entering a bus lane, etc., to permit progress of a police vehicle behind which is on blues and twos and/or sounding the horn".

Answer 1: The police advanced driver referenced on page 1, the Association of Chief Police Officers, the Blue Light Aware website, the Ask The Police website, various Councils, and various safety camera operators, have all said yes, in that scenario you ARE breaking the law, you CAN be prosecuted, if there is a camera you WILL receive a fixed penalty notice of a fine and points which you will have to challenge if you do not want to pay it and the Court MAY take the situation into consideration.

Answer 2: Mainbeam says that they are all wrong and that you are not breaking the law and that you cannot be prosecuted.

So unless someone has personal extensive knowledge of the law, they can use the above to make a judgement on whether or not they can be prosecuted.

Simples!

User avatar
dvenman
Posts: 261
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2015 5:28 am

Re: Blues and Twos and Traffic Lights

Postby dvenman » Tue Sep 20, 2016 5:39 am

I find it ironic that a user called "mainbeam" appears to have left me less illuminated than before...

Jonquirk
Posts: 334
Joined: Tue Sep 29, 2015 6:48 pm
Location: Guildford

Re: Blues and Twos and Traffic Lights

Postby Jonquirk » Tue Sep 20, 2016 7:17 am

dvenman wrote:I find it ironic that a user called "mainbeam" appears to have left me less illuminated than before...


I find the usual result of someone else's mainbeam is to leave me dazzled or blinded.

mainbeam
Posts: 162
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2015 12:32 am

Re: Blues and Twos and Traffic Lights

Postby mainbeam » Tue Sep 20, 2016 8:25 am

akirk wrote:Statutory law does not require you to obey a constable not regulating traffic (i.e. in a car behind you)

So the question then comes down to whether any case law now requires that, and I am not aware of any...


Johnson v Phillips. A case that pointedly did not concern a Police officer regulating traffic under statutory powers. It concerned the common law power of a Police officer to control traffic in the course of his duties. They are not the same.

For the statutory power to apply the Police officer must be for the time being engaged in the regulation of traffic.

For the common law power no such qualification exists. Don't make the mistake of conflating the two.

The common law provides a defence to the statutory offence. No need to be confused by Alasdair's posts.

User avatar
Horse
Posts: 3558
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 9:20 am

Re: Blues and Twos and Traffic Lights

Postby Horse » Tue Sep 20, 2016 8:51 am

Was there ever agreement [here] that the toots the OP heard were the coper changing the siren, rather than using the horn to: show annoyance/frustration, indicate the presence of the police vehicle, issue a command (i.e. give a direction for the OP to move forwards), wake the OP from his slumbers . . . ?
Your 'standard' is how you drive alone, not how you drive during a test.

User avatar
akirk
Posts: 1659
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 6:58 pm
Location: Bristol

Re: Blues and Twos and Traffic Lights

Postby akirk » Tue Sep 20, 2016 9:52 am

mainbeam wrote:
akirk wrote:Statutory law does not require you to obey a constable not regulating traffic (i.e. in a car behind you)

So the question then comes down to whether any case law now requires that, and I am not aware of any...


Johnson v Phillips. A case that pointedly did not concern a Police officer regulating traffic under statutory powers. It concerned the common law power of a Police officer to control traffic in the course of his duties. They are not the same.

For the statutory power to apply the Police officer must be for the time being engaged in the regulation of traffic.

For the common law power no such qualification exists. Don't make the mistake of conflating the two.

The common law provides a defence to the statutory offence. No need to be confused by Alasdair's posts.


Sorry - that is tosh :D

Johnson v Phillips [1975]
Facts: A police officer ordered a driver to reverse down a one way street, the wrong way, to allow an ambulance past to get to an accident
Issue: Was refusing to comply with this order an obstruction of an officer in the execution of his duty?
Decision: Yes
Reasoning: Officer was saving life and limb


That is not the same scenario as we have above - there is no debate that a police officer has the right to direct you - and you should obey - but there is no statutory / common / case law to suggest / imply / state that this is possible from within a car behind, using sirens and lights to do the directing:
- as I understand it Johnson v Phillips made clear that the constable couldn't direct you to do something dangerous (from a car behind they have no way of knowing whether moving into a junction with traffic potentially coming the other way might be dangerous)
- the constable has no control over the situation
- the constable is not able to direct all traffic
- sirens and lights do not constitute direction - they are warnings, not instructions they certainly can't direct a motorist to move on a specific path (which is a requirement of the ability to direct someone under statutory law)

Johnson v Phillips was different
- the constable was controlling the situation, was able to have clarity over it being safe to reverse down the one-way street, was able to specifically direct the motorist...
- at no point does Johnson v Phillips create case law that applies in the above scenario of a police car from behind instructing you to cross a red light
- at no point does Johnson v Phillips create case law of any kind - it merely confirms the authority to direct coming from a constable's authority to choose under common law when it is safe to disregard certain statutory requirements, as such it clarifies statutory law, it doesn't change it...

There is a very good discussion about this on the old forum: http://www.advanced-driving.co.uk/forum ... 5&start=45

basics it comes down to though is that as per the original post - a police driver can not direct you from their car sitting behind you to jump a red light into a crossing they are not controlling - and there is as far as I know no law statutory or common to allow them to do that specific action - yes we all accept that there are times when a police officer can direct you, but to assume from that to a point where you assume blues and twos to be specific direction is a jump too far, and certainly not one I have ever seen supported in law - and in a court, the prosecution will challenge you - how was the officer directing you / what were the directions / how did they specify a path or direction for you to follow / how was there clarity in that direction /how did they communicate that direction... oh they had lights and a siren on - sorry, that is not an instruction or direction to jump a red light - case closed.

Alasdair

Rolyan
Posts: 660
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2016 5:45 pm

Re: Blues and Twos and Traffic Lights

Postby Rolyan » Tue Sep 20, 2016 10:34 am

Surely the argument here is really simple. The Police, the Courts and the enforcement agencies have all stated that it IS an offence and you CAN be prosecuted.

Copies of googled case law, ill informed opinions and a blind belief in a better world doesn't change that.

User avatar
Horse
Posts: 3558
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 9:20 am

Re: Blues and Twos and Traffic Lights

Postby Horse » Tue Sep 20, 2016 11:21 am

Rolyan wrote: Copies of googled case law, ill informed opinions and a blind belief in a better world doesn't change that.


But but but . . . this is the Internet! :? :lol:
Your 'standard' is how you drive alone, not how you drive during a test.

User avatar
Strangely Brown
Posts: 1018
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 8:06 pm
Location: Sussex

Re: Blues and Twos and Traffic Lights

Postby Strangely Brown » Tue Sep 20, 2016 11:28 am

mainbeam yesterday...

Image


Return to “Advanced Driving - Cars”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests