Driver & Vehicle Standard Agency v Titan Containers Ltd

For statutory maximum-length rules, “overall length” includes all parts of the vehicle, including the vehicle structure on which special equipment is mounted. An exception for a crane or other special appliance excludes the appliance only where it projects beyond the vehicle’s perimeter. It does not exclude the underlying chassis or bodywork from the measurement. A construction allowing a vehicle to exceed the statutory limit merely because excess length was used to mount exempt equipment would undermine the purpose of the restrictions, including road safety. The separate regime governing forward and rearward projections is consistent with that interpretation.

A lorry operated by Titan Containers Ltd was measured by the Driver & Vehicle Standards Agency at 17.65 metres. It included a 1.5-metre crane base mounted between the tractive unit and the trailer.

Titan was prosecuted for using a vehicle exceeding the maximum length permitted for its class under the Road Vehicles (Construction & Use) Regulations 1986. The magistrates accepted Titan’s construction that the crane base should be deducted and acquitted it. They stated a case for the High Court on whether that deduction was correct.

1. The acquittal was quashed. The case was remitted to the justices with a direction to convict.

2. The natural meaning of “overall length” in regulation 3(2) includes all parts of the vehicle, together with permanent receptacles and fittings, subject to the specified exceptions. The vehicle parts on which a crane is mounted therefore remain included in the measurement.

3. The exception for a special appliance or apparatus under regulation 3(2)(i)(n), read with regulation 81(c), has practical effect where the appliance projects beyond the vehicle. In that situation the appliance is excluded from the overall-length calculation. The exception does not exclude the underlying chassis or other vehicle structure.

4. The alternative construction would allow a lorry to exceed the 16.5-metre limit by using the excess length to mount a crane, even where the crane did not project beyond the vehicle. That result would undermine the purpose of the length restrictions, including road safety.

5. Regulation 81(d) and (e), together with regulation 82 and Schedule 12, establish a separate regime for forward and rearward projections. They regulate the measurement and safe use of projections beyond the front or rear of the vehicle. They are consistent with excluding a qualifying projecting appliance from overall length, but do not justify excluding vehicle structure within the vehicle’s extreme points.

6. Regulations 81(g), (h) and (j) identify the points and method of measuring a combination of vehicles and do not alter the meaning of “overall length” in regulation 3(2).

• High Court (Administrative Court): On a case stated by Plymouth Magistrates’ Court, the court answered “No” to the question whether the crane base could be deducted, quashed the acquittal and remitted the case with a direction to convict.
• Plymouth Magistrates’ Court: The justices accepted Titan’s construction of the Road Vehicles (Construction & Use) Regulations 1986 and acquitted Titan.