Road Traffic Offences: Special Reasons

When sentencing many road traffic offences the court has the option of imposing a driving disqualification or endorsing the offender's driving licence.

However, in accordance with subsection 34(1) of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988, the court does not need to impose either a disqualification or endorsement if it is satisfied, on the balance of probabilities, that there are special reasons not to do so. Those special reasons must be directly related to the offence, rather than the individual circumstances of the offender (in which case exceptional hardship might be a consideration instead).

The Court of Appeal has determined that in order to constitute a special reason [R v Wickens (1958) 42 Cr App R 436 (CA)], the court must be satisfied that the matter:

• Must be a mitigating or extentuating circumstance;
• Must be directly connected to the commission of the offence;
• Does not amount to a defence in law;
• Be one that the court ought properly to take into consideration when sentencing the offence.

If the court finds there are special reasons it may impose a lesser penalty than it ordinarily would. This could mean imposing fewer penalty points, penalty points as an alternative to disqualification, a shorter period of disqualification or a discharge in place of a financial penalty.

Even if the court finds special reasons, it can choose not to exercise its discretion in relation to sentencing.

As I may have mentioned previously, in the age of centralised courts I don't deal with road traffic offences very regularly. However, a case like this recently popped up in the list, which has spurred me into writing this now.

As you might imagine, special reasons could encompass a multitude of different situations. Thinking back to a case a few years ago, the court found special reasons to avoid disqualifying a man for driving with excess alcohol.

The man in question jumped into the car, in drink, having just received a worrying phone call from his grown up daughter. The daughter's estranged partner, who had been jailed for a vicious assault on her, had just been released from prison and was snooping around in the garden. The father sped around to her house, which was only a few streets away in the same rural village, to ensure her welfare. He had clipped a garden wall when he parked up, which is why he was breathalysed when the police eventually arrived.

Given the circumstances, the court decided to impose an absolute discharge.