Cooksley & Anor v R

For causing death by dangerous driving, culpability is the dominant sentencing consideration, although death and its consequences remain relevant. Sentencers should select a starting-point category by the seriousness of the driving, then adjust for aggravation and mitigation without double counting. Immediate custody will generally be necessary, even where the dangerous driving was brief or resulted from a momentary error; a non-custodial outcome requires exceptional mitigation.

The court issued four starting points: 12–18 months where there are no aggravating circumstances; 2–3 years for intermediate culpability; 4–5 years for higher culpability; and six years or more for the most serious culpability. The same framework applies to causing death by careless driving while under the influence of drink or drugs. Disqualification is chiefly protective and should reflect the future road risk demonstrated by the offender.

Four matters were heard together so that the court could reconsider sentencing guidance for causing death by dangerous driving and causing death by careless driving while under the influence of drink or drugs. Three appellants challenged Crown Court sentences. The Attorney General referred Richard Crump’s suspended sentence as unduly lenient under section 36 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988.

• Cooksley: convicted after a guilty plea of causing death by careless driving while under the influence of drink; his four-year sentence was challenged.
• Stride: convicted after trial of causing death by dangerous driving after his lorry left the motorway and killed a person; he challenged imprisonment and disqualification.
• Cook: pleaded guilty to two offences of causing death by dangerous driving; he challenged seven years’ detention.
• Crump: convicted of causing death by dangerous driving after crossing a railway line as barriers descended and fatally striking a pedestrian; the Attorney General challenged a 12-month suspended sentence.

The central issue was the appropriate relationship between culpability, the fatal outcome and mitigation when sentencing these offences.

1. Fresh guideline issued. The court accepted the Sentencing Advisory Panel’s general approach. The offender’s culpability is the dominant component of sentence, but death, multiple deaths, serious additional injury and the impact on the victim’s family remain relevant. The new guidance applied immediately to sentences passed after the judgment.
2. Starting points. For causing death by dangerous driving, the appropriate starting points in a contested adult case are: 12–18 months where there are no aggravating circumstances; 2–3 years for intermediate culpability; 4–5 years for higher culpability; and six years or more for the most serious culpability. The category is selected principally by the standard of driving and relevant aggravating features. The same factor must not both place the offence in a higher category and increase sentence again.
3. Aggravation and mitigation. Aggravating features include alcohol or drugs, excessive speed, racing or showing off, deliberate or sustained bad driving, avoidable distraction, known sleep deprivation, dangerous vehicle condition, poor driving history, multiple deaths, serious additional injury and irresponsible conduct after the event. Multiple deaths increase sentence but do not justify arithmetical multiplication. Serious or life-changing injury to the offender may mitigate because imprisonment will be more onerous, but injury is not automatically mitigating. Immediate custody will generally be required; a non-custodial outcome needs exceptional mitigation.
4. Careless driving while under the influence. No separate sentencing scale was needed. The four categories can accommodate the full culpability of the driving and the alcohol or drug-related aggravation.
5. Disqualification. Its principal purpose is preventative. Its length should reflect the future road risk revealed by the offence and record, rather than anticipated early release; an extended re-test is also required.
6. Individual outcomes. Cooksley’s appeal was dismissed. Stride’s sentence was reduced from two and a half years to 18 months and his disqualification from five to three years. Cook’s detention was reduced from seven to six years. The Attorney General’s reference in Crump was allowed: the sentence was varied to two years’ imprisonment suspended for two years, while the four-year disqualification and extended re-test remained.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): issued fresh sentencing guidance and determined the three sentence appeals and the Attorney General’s reference.
• Crown Court: Cooksley was sentenced at Newport Crown Court; Stride at Maidstone Crown Court; Cook by the Recorder of Liverpool; and Crump at Chichester Crown Court. The separate Crown Court decisions are not given neutral citations in the judgment.