Parker, R (on the application of) v Bradford Crown Court

Secondary legislation may amend primary legislation under section 2(2)(b) of the European Communities Act 1972 where the amendment arises out of, or is related to, an obligation arising from Community law. The power may cover a minor amendment directed at the same mischief and objective, even if it goes beyond what the obligation strictly requires. Section 2(2)(a) does not authorise legislation where it is clear that no obligation exists. Extending an existing offence by amending its statutory scope does not necessarily create a new criminal offence.

The claimant sought judicial review of his conviction for failing to stop, report an accident and provide information under section 170 of the Road Traffic Act 1988. The accident occurred in a public-house car park. The Motor Vehicles (Compulsory Insurance) Regulations 2000 had inserted “or other public place” into section 170(1).

He argued that the Regulations were ultra vires section 2(2)(a) or (b) of the European Communities Act 1972, and that they created a new criminal offence contrary to Schedule 2. The central questions were whether the amendment was sufficiently connected with the relevant Community obligations and whether it was prohibited as the creation of a new offence.

1. The claim failed. Section 2(2)(a) of the European Communities Act 1972 did not provide the power relied upon. In light of Clarke v General Accident Fire and Life Insurance Corporation [1998] 1 WLR 1647, “road” did not include a public car park.
2. The Regulations were authorised by section 2(2)(b). The legislation had been enacted to implement Community motor-insurance obligations. Extending “road” to other public places was a minor amendment addressing the same mischief and pursuing the same objective. It therefore arose out of, or was related to, the relevant obligation.
3. The court explained the distinction from Oakley Inc v Animal Ltd [2006] Ch 337. That case concerned clear choices left to Member States by a directive. The present amendment went beyond what Community law might strictly require but remained closely connected with the obligation.
4. The late argument under Schedule 2 paragraph 1(1)(d) also failed. The Regulations did not create a new offence. They extended the scope of an existing offence by amending the statutory description of where the accident occurred.
5. Mr Justice Lloyd Jones agreed with Lord Justice Waller.

First-instance judicial review in the Administrative Court. No earlier decision in the same proceedings is stated.