McCurry, R v

Driving disqualification serves to protect the public. Its length should be proportionate to that purpose and should take account of the custodial sentence imposed, the offender’s driving record and rehabilitation.

For an offender with a long, wholly clean professional driving record, the obligatory minimum disqualification may be sufficient even after a serious offence of causing death by careless driving. An extended driving test is not necessarily appropriate unless the offender’s record or other circumstances show a public-safety need for renewed certification of driving competence.

The appellant pleaded guilty in Leeds Magistrates’ Court to causing death by careless or inconsiderate driving. He was committed to the Crown Court at Leeds for sentence.

The Crown Court imposed 24 weeks’ imprisonment, disqualified him from driving for three years, and ordered an extended driving test. The appellant did not challenge the custodial sentence. He appealed, with leave of the single judge, against the length of disqualification and the retest order.

The central issue was whether those driving penalties were excessive given the seriousness of the offence, the appellant’s age, his long and clean professional driving record, and the effect on his rehabilitation and employment.

1. Appeal allowed. The three-year disqualification was excessive and was reduced to the obligatory period of 12 months. The extended driving test order was set aside.

2. The purpose of disqualification is the protection of the public. In setting its duration, the court should consider whether a longer period is required for that purpose, while also taking account of the sentence already imposed and the offender’s rehabilitation after custody.

3. The seriousness of causing death by careless driving did not itself justify a longer ban. The appellant was 60, had an absolutely clean driving record, and had driven heavy goods vehicles professionally for many years. In those circumstances, the statutory minimum was the proportionate period.

4. An extended driving test may be appropriate for drivers with a poor record, including younger offenders whose return to driving requires certification of competence for public-safety reasons. The appellant’s clean record did not demonstrate such a need. The seriousness of the present offence did not make a retest necessary.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): Allowed the appeal against the driving disqualification and retest order.
• Crown Court at Leeds: On 11 March 2010, imposed 24 weeks’ imprisonment, a three-year driving disqualification, and an extended driving test following committal for sentence.
• Leeds Magistrates’ Court: On 11 February 2010, accepted the appellant’s guilty plea to causing death by careless or inconsiderate driving and committed him to the Crown Court for sentence.