Ashton v Crown Prosecution Service

A private vehicle used by an employee travelling to collect a liveried ambulance is not thereby an emergency vehicle or an ambulance. The statutory definitions require the vehicle itself to be constructed, adapted and used for conveying sick, injured or disabled persons, or to be used for ambulance purposes.

A genuine emergency may constitute a special reason for withholding a driving-licence endorsement. A foreseeable and routine requirement to attend work, even to provide an ambulance, is unlikely to qualify. Special reasons must be directly connected with the commission of the offence and must be circumstances the court ought properly to consider when sentencing.

The claimant appealed by way of case stated from his convictions by Birmingham Magistrates Court. He had driven his private Mitsubishi Shogun with a flashing blue warning beacon, exceeded a 30 mph speed limit and failed to comply with traffic lights.

He had been called from home by his private ambulance employer to attend work and drive a liveried ambulance to retrieve a child patient. The magistrates held that his private vehicle was not an emergency vehicle or an ambulance within the Road Vehicle Lighting Regulations 1989. They nevertheless found special reasons not to endorse his licence.

The issues were whether the vehicle fell within the statutory definitions and whether the magistrates had properly addressed special reasons.

1. Appeal dismissed. The magistrates had approached the statutory question correctly by asking whether the claimant’s vehicle fell within the definitions in the Road Vehicle Lighting Regulations 1989.
2. The private Mitsubishi was neither a vehicle used for ambulance purposes nor an ambulance constructed or adapted for conveying sick, injured or disabled persons and used for that purpose. The fact that it was being used to travel to a depot to collect an ambulance did not alter its character.
3. The court applied the criteria identified in R v Crossen and R v Wickens. A special reason must be a mitigating or extenuating circumstance, not amounting to a defence, directly connected with the offence and properly considered when imposing sentence.
4. A genuine emergency may amount to a special reason. However, a situation that is foreseeable and routine is unlikely to do so. A normal arrangement under which employees remained at home ready to be called to work did not constitute a genuine emergency. An unexpected absence of the usual driver, or an unforeseen urgent need with no other available driver, might have done so.
5. The stated case did not provide adequate information about the alleged emergency. The court declined to remit the issue and also declined to quash the decision not to endorse the licence. It dismissed the appeal and ordered the claimant to pay the respondent’s costs of £1,000.

• High Court (Administrative Court): appeal by way of case stated from Birmingham Magistrates Court dismissed.