Ashton v DPP

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Judgment Date23 June 1995
Date23 June 1995
CourtHouse of Lords

Queen's Bench Divisional Court

Before Lord Justice Balcombe and Mr Justice Buxton

Ashton
and
Director of Public Prosecutions

Criminal evidence - challenge to use of intoximeter

Challenge to test machine

When seeking to challenge the admissibility of evidence from an intoximeter programmed in a way approved by the Home Office to compensate for the presence of a substance other than alcohol, it would be appropriate to make a challenge under section 78 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 and not section 69.

The Queen's Bench Divisional Court so stated when dismissing an appeal by case stated by Colin Ashton of his conviction by Leicester Justices on January 25, 1995 of driving with excess alcohol contrary to section 5(1)(a) of the Road Traffic Act 1988

Mr Andrew Alty for Mr Ashton; Mr Paul Mann for the prosecution.

LORD JUSTICE BALCOMBE said that evidence concerning the Lion Intoximeter 3000 machine was that at the state of scientific knowledge at the time it was produced it was thought proper to programme it in a way that if something believed to be acetone triggered the sensor, the machine compensated by reducing the reading given for the level of alcohol.

It could not be said that use of the machine as still approved by the Home Office could amount to improper use, since that allegation indicated something amounting to impropriety or use in such a manner as to produce an unfair evidence designed or weighted against the defendant.

It was arguable to say that a statement produced by the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • Mahon v Rahn
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • May 23, 1997
    ...for damages for malicious prosecution notwithstanding the recent liberalising decision of the House of Lords in Martin v Watson (The Times, 14 July 1995). It may be that in such circumstances the Crown Court might be willing to exercise its discretion in favour of varying the undertaking, o......
  • Hunt v AB
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • October 22, 2009
    ...deliberately manipulated them into taking a course which they would not otherwise have taken if, pursuant to Martin v WatsonTLRELR (The Times July 14, 1995; [1996] AC 74), she was to be regarded in law as the prosecutor. The assertion that the claimant was telling the truth and the defendan......
2 books & journal articles

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT