Traffic Law Quiz

D - Although allowed to go through red light, any accident and she'd have liability, she should have seen the pedestrian and expected them to act like the idiot they usually are :)
 
Quite clearly B. Davis had no reasonable grounds to believe Newbury would not insure the vehicle and has thus discharged liability for a cause/permit offence.

Edit GRRR didnt notice that one had finished.

Next question is C. Emergency Services must treat a red traffic light as a give way, therefore she MAY be guilty of Driving Without Due Care but that depends on her actions immediatly prior to the incident.
 
Last edited:
[TW]Fox;10550124 said:
Emergency Services must treat a red traffic light as a give way
Click to expand...

The emergency services do not have to give way, only avoid hitting anything already using the junction.
 
Last edited:
Cobra said:
I'm saying B+E! Lol and if you look at my score, you may decide it's wise to not follow my example ;)
Click to expand...

Oh the irony, you're the only person to get this right, have 10 points :)

Answer B - There is no special exemption for emergency services drivers with regard to standards of driving, and they will be judged against the standards which apply to all drivers. There is an exemption which allows emergency drivers to pass through red lights under the Traffic Signs Regulations 2002 (reg.36(1)(b)). However, this does not exempt emergency drivers from having to drive with due care and attention. Answer A is therefore incorrect.

Answer C is incorrect because of the case of DPP Vs Harris [1995], where the driver of a police surveillance vehicle following a suspect drove though a red light. The court held that even though the suspects were being followed to the scene of an armed robbery, the seriousness of the circumstances did not provide an exemption.

Answer D is incorrect (and consequently B is correct), because of the ruling in the case of Keyse vs Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police [2001]. This was a case defended on behalf of a police driver, but would presumably apply to other emergency service drivers. The court held that the police driver, who was driving with the vehicle’s visual and audible warning equipment in operation, was not liable for the injuries to a pedestrian who stepped off the pavement into the path of the vehicle.

These scores are looking like something from QI :P

Burnsy
 
Last edited:
A slightly easier one:

Question 4
MICHAELS was driving his car on a road when his mobile phone rang. He did not have a hands-free kit, therefore he stopped at the side of the road. MICHAELS answered the phone while his car was stationary, with the engine still running. The handbrake was unset and MICHAELS was controlling the vehicle with the foot brake. He remained in this position for 10 minutes, before completing the call and driving off.

In these circumstances, would MICHAELS have been the driver of the motor vehicle while it was stationary?

A. No, as the vehicle was stationary, he was no longer the driver.
B. Yes, he will be the driver until the end of his journey.
C. Yes, because he was controlling the propulsion of the vehicle with the foot brake.
D. No, the vehicle was stationary for only a short period of time.

Burnsy
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom