In the Scottish Courts
| DOI | 10.1177/002201836603000105 |
| Published date | 01 January 1966 |
| Date | 01 January 1966 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
In the Scottish Courts
MEANING
OF
'PUBLIC
ROAD'
MacNeill v. Dunbar
THE accused in MacNeill v. Dunbar (1965
S.L.T.
(Notes)
79) was charged with contravening the Vehicles Excise Act,
1962 by keeping amotor vehicle on a public road without a
licence. Section 24 (1) of
the
Act defines a public road as a
road repairable at public expense.
The
alleged road was
described in the case as
'an
excrescence' on a service road at
the
west of a certain street, constructed to prevent vehicles
parking on
and
obstructing
the
service road. Although built
at a different time
and
of different materials from the service
road, it was built on
the
same level
and
was used by cars
making a
V-turn
on the service road.
The
'excrescence'
and
the
service road were contiguous, and there was no question of
any separate access road from one to
the
other.
The
Court held
that
whether a car park or lay by was part of a road was a
question of circumstances, depending inter alia on whether it
was materially separated from the road.
There
was in this case
no such separation as existed, for example, in Griffin v. Squires
([1958] 1 W.L.R.
II06),
and the Court held
that
the
locus of
the offence in the instant case was a road.
They
added that
the
fact
that
it was liable to be repaired by
the
local authority in its
capacity as housing authority, and
not
in its capacity as road
authority, was irrelevant.
EVIDENCE OF SOCII
CRIMINIS-CO-ACCUSED-WARNING
Slowey and Anr, v.
H.M.
Adv.
Slowey and Anr. v.
H.M.
Adv. (1965
S.L.T.
309) clarifies
two points relating to the evidence of accomplices, known still
in Scotland by
the
Latin appellation 'sociicriminis'.
The
first
relates to
the
position ofaco-accused, and
the
second to
the
warning required to be given to the
jury
as to how they are to
treat
the
evidence of a
socius.
4S
To continue reading
Request your trial