Interesting appeal ruling on mobile phone usage.

[Mjolinor]

I wondered that. Can you be prosecuted as a passenger if you allow the driver to use a phone. It certainly seems so. So where is that line drawn. If I am waiting to cross the road and a guy drives past on his phone can I be prosecuted for not throwing myself under his wheels in order to force him to stop. :)

This law is a complete joke and wants scrapping. Use a real proper thought out law not one written by loony leftie treehugger veggies. :)

[milleplod]

'Causing' could be an employer who requires a driver employee to have to use a mobile to be able to carry out his/her duties properly. 'Permitting' could be the aforementioned driver who is supervising a learner - if the learner uses a mobile whilst driving, the supervisor has 'permitted' due to the fact that he/she is 'in charge' of the vehicle. A supervisor can also be prosecuted under drink-drive legislation.

Pete

[milleplod]

I wondered that. Can you be prosecuted as a passenger if you allow the driver to use a phone. It certainly seems so. So where is that line drawn. If I am waiting to cross the road and a guy drives past on his phone can I be prosecuted for not throwing myself under his wheels in order to force him to stop. :)

This law is a complete joke and wants scrapping. Use a real proper thought out law not one written by loony leftie treehugger veggies. :)

No....only if you're supervising a learner, because then you do have certain responsibilities and liabilities.

Pete

[Rob Frankhamr]

Hi

prohibit a person from driving, or causing or permitting a person to drive,

what is "causing or permitting", apart from forcing a knife point oe supervising a learner?


George

In somewhat simplistic terms...

Say a van with (for instance) defective brakes is owned by a company and the owner of the company were to instruct a driver employed by the company to use the vehicle, that would come under the heading of 'causing' a person to commit an offence.

If the driver were to come to the owner and ask permission to use the vehicle out of hours and that permission was granted, the owner would be permitting the offence.

In both instances, both the driver and the owner might be committing offences.

I can't think of a way that 'permitting' would be relevant to mobile phone offences but I could see that, if the owner of a company insists that his drivers answer the phone immediately, even when they are driving, he could be held to be 'causing' the offence.

Rob

[milleplod]

Hi

prohibit a person from driving, or causing or permitting a person to drive,

what is "causing or permitting", apart from forcing a knife point oe supervising a learner?


George

In somewhat simplistic terms...

Say a van with (for instance) defective brakes is owned by a company and the owner of the company were to instruct a driver employed by the company to use the vehicle, that would come under the heading of 'causing' a person to commit an offence.

If the driver were to come to the owner and ask permission to use the vehicle out of hours and that permission was granted, the owner would be permitting the offence.

In both instances, both the driver and the owner might be committing offences.

I can't think of a way that 'permitting' would be relevant to mobile phone offences but I could see that, if the owner of a company insists that his drivers answer the phone immediately, even when they are driving, he could be held to be 'causing' the offence.

Rob

I gave one a couple of replies above yours Rob!

Pete

[Richard(Sande)Sanders]

Permitting as an employer would be having a set of rules or procedures in place detailing how, &
when you could use a handheld device, & a disciplinary procedure in force for when someone is caught
breaching those rules. Then, when someone is caught breaking said rules, doing nothing about it, thus
allowing, permitting, the act to be repeated.

[Rob Frankhamr]

Permitting as an employer would be having a set of rules or procedures in place detailing how, &
when you could use a handheld device, & a disciplinary procedure in force for when someone is caught
breaching those rules. Then, when someone is caught breaking said rules, doing nothing about it, thus
allowing, permitting, the act to be repeated.

I'd love to hear that one argued in court... but I don't think it would go anywhere.

Rob