R v Krawec

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
CourtCourt of Appeal (Criminal Division)
Judgment Date26 November 1984
Judgment citation (vLex)[1984] EWCA Crim J1126-1
Docket NumberNo. 2384/B/84
Date26 November 1984

[1984] EWCA Crim J1126-1



Royal Courts of Justice


The Lord Chief Justice of England (Lord Lane)


Mr. Justice Otton

No. 2384/B/84

Ihor Krawec

MISS R. FOSTER appeared on behalf of the Appellant.


On the afternoon of 5th January 1983 the appellant was riding his motorcycle at the junction of Maple Street, University Street and Tottenham Court Road. He collided with an elderly male pedestrian, who died six days later. When interviewed the appellant admitted that he might have gone through the traffic lights whilst they were showing red against him. He said that he was concentrating on the car in front of him which was turning right, and only saw the pedestrian when it was too late.


On 29th March 1984 at the Central Criminal Court the appellant was acquitted of causing death by reckless driving, but was convicted of driving without due care and attention. He was fined £350 and his licence was endorsed with 5 penalty points.


He now appeals against sentence by leave of the single Judge.


He is 25 years of age. He has no previous convictions. At the time of the accident he was employed as a motorcycle messenger earning about £150 per week gross. He left that employment because he was dissatisfied with the job. From March 1983 until June 1983 he was again employed as a motorcycle messenger, earning approximately £180 per week gross. He left this job because he wanted to find something more mentally rewarding. At the time of his appearance at Court he was unemployed.


Miss Foster who appeared for the appellant before this Court, and also at the trial, submits that the case contained no serious aggravating features; there was no suggestion of alcohol or of grossly excessive speed nor of racing nor of uninsured use. On the contrary, there was unchallenged evidence from the police that the appellant's vehicle was well maintained and that the appellant showed extreme concern for the deceased, travelling with him to hospital in the ambulance. She submitted that the learned Judge failed to give adequate weight to the appellant's previous good character and unblemished driving record, and also to his modest means.


Miss Foster raised two further matters which have particularly exercised the Court. First, she submits that the learned Judge erred in regarding the fatality that ensued from the accident as an aggravating feature of the case. Although there is no transcript of the proceedings, she tells us from her note that when sentencing the learned Judge said this: "This was a serious case because death resulted."


She submits that in a case of careless driving, the gravity of the consequences – in this case the death of the pedestrian – are not relevant to the penalty. She cites in support a passage from Wilkinson's Road Traffic Offences, Eleventh Edition, at page...

To continue reading

Request your trial
20 cases
  • R v Simmonds
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
    • 22 January 1999
    ...erred in principle in taking into account the death of Mr Tarver when passing sentence. He relies upon the judgment of Lord Lane CJ in R v Krawec [1984] 6 Cr App R (S) 367 at 369: "In our judgment the unforeseen and unexpected results of the carelessness are not in themselves relevant ......
  • R v Mark Barrie King
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
    • 20 March 2001
    ...a separate penalty on counts 2 and 3, but left the disqualification at the level he had originally imposed. 10 This Court said in the case of Krawec (1984) 6 Cr App R(S) 367 that in cases such as this that what it called the "unforeseen and unexpected consequences" of careless dri......
  • R v Steel
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
    • 15 July 1992
    ......That was shown by the nature of the offence and the state of mind of the offender in a case of reckless driving. Unforeseen consequences might be relevant (R v KrawecUNK (1984) 6 CrAppr (S) 367)). In the Court of Appeal's view, when sentencing in cases of reckless driving where personal injury had been caused, a judge had to consider and give full weight to all the facts and circumstances, including the gravity of the consequences of the driving. This was a bad ......
  • DPP v Peter O'Dwyer
    • Ireland
    • Court of Criminal Appeal
    • 28 July 2005
    ...the consequences of an offence - and in the latter event in what proportions - is ultimately a question of choice and policy. R v Krawec [1985] R.T.R. 1 was clearly valid in its context and at its time, but we do not see it as of assistance to sentencing courts in the different context of t......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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