Motor Vehicle in UK Law

The Act does not define the word "drive" and in its simplest meaning we think that it refers to a person using the driver's controls for the purpose of directing the movement of the vehicle. It matters not that the vehicle is not moving under its own power, or driven by the force of gravity, or even that it is being pushed by other well-wishers. The essence of driving is the use of the driver's controls in order to direct the movement, however that movement is produced.

There are an infinite number of ways in which a person may control the movement of a motor vehicle, apart from the orthodox one of sitting in the driving seat and using the engine for propulsion. Although the word "drive" must be given a wide meaning, the Courts must be alert to see that the net is not thrown so widely that it includes activities which cannot be said to be driving a motor vehicle in any ordinary use of that word in the English language.

The last case to which we would refer is Ames v. MacLeod, 1969 S.C., 1, where the facts were very close to those of the instant case. The accused, who was alleged to have been driving a motor car, had been walking beside it as it ran down a slight incline, and had steered it by placing his hand on the wheel. The dividing line will not always be easy to draw, and the distinction will often turn on the extent and degree to which the defendant was relying on the use of the driver's controls.

One circumstance in which the requirement to provide a specimen of breath may be made to a "person driving" is if a constable in uniform has reasonable cause to suspect such "person driving" of having committed a traffic offence while the vehicle "was" in motion. In my view, there are the clearest possible indications that the "person driving" may still be the "person driving" even after the motor vehicle is no longer "in motion".

Driving a motor vehicle on a road or public place connotes a physical act. It is true that the section must be given a reasonable interpretation and cannot be interpreted literally because a request for a breath test cannot be made while a vehicle is in motion. Nor is there any reason to confine the act of driving to driving while the vehicle is in motion. Among the normal incidents of driving a motor vehicle is stopping at traffic lights, in traffic congestion or at a railway crossing.

My Lords, I do not doubt that the principles applicable to the implied repeal of an earlier by a later statute are well established. But today those old cases must be approached and applied with caution. Until comparatively late in the last century statutes were not drafted with the same skill as today. No doubt the prosecuting authorities today would only prosecute for manslaughter in the case of death caused by the reckless driving of a motor vehicle on a road in a very grave case.

The Commissioners' policy does not, however, draw a distinction between the commercial smuggler and the driver importing goods for social distribution to family or friends in circumstances where there is no attempt to make a profit.