R v Misho Tamoev

For causing serious injury by careless or inconsiderate driving, a case may fall within culpability category A and harm category 1 where the driving is just below the dangerous-driving standard and the injury is permanent, irreversible and substantially affects ordinary activities. The resulting custodial starting point may justify immediate custody. Sentencers must avoid counting the same facts again when increasing the sentence, and good character may require mitigation. Factors favouring suspension do not require suspension where the seriousness of the offence makes immediate custody the only sufficient punishment. A guilty-plea reduction is applied to the corrected sentence. Where custody is imposed, statutory driving-disqualification periods must be extended so that disqualification is not served during custody.

R v Misho Tamoev arose from a guilty plea to causing serious injury by careless or inconsiderate driving. The Crown Court at Leicester sentenced the applicant to ten months’ imprisonment and disqualified him for two years and five months. The applicant sought leave to appeal, arguing that custody was not justified, or alternatively should have been suspended, and that the sentence was excessive. The Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) considered the proper culpability and harm categories, whether the sentencing judge had double counted the facts, whether immediate custody was required despite factors favouring suspension, and the resulting driving-disqualification period under the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988.

The court granted leave to appeal and allowed the appeal in part.

1. Culpability and harm. The sentencing judge was entitled to place the offence in culpability category A because the standard of driving was just below the threshold for dangerous driving. Harm category 1 was also appropriate because the victim suffered a permanent, irreversible injury with a substantial and long-term effect on her ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities. Those classifications produced a 12-month custodial starting point, and the court accepted that custody was justified.
2. Double counting and mitigation. There was no justification for increasing the sentence above the starting point. The judge had already taken the relevant facts into account when fixing the 12-month starting point. Reliance on those facts again constituted double counting. The applicant’s previous good character was mitigation and warranted a three-month reduction. Applying one-third credit for the guilty plea to the resulting nine-month sentence produced six months.
3. Suspension. Factors favouring suspension included a realistic prospect of rehabilitation in the community, low risk of reoffending or causing harm, strong personal mitigation, the harmful effect of immediate custody on the applicant’s partner and daughter, and the absence of a history of poor compliance with court orders. Those factors did not require suspension. The poor standard of driving and the seriousness of its consequences meant that appropriate punishment could only be achieved by immediate custody.
4. Disqualification. Under section 34 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988, a disqualification of at least 12 months was obligatory, absent special reasons, for relevant offences including causing serious injury by careless driving. Section 2C of the Road Traffic Act 1988 identified the relevant offence. Sections 35A and 35B of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 required the period to be extended so that disqualification was not served during custody.
5. The ten-month sentence was quashed and six months’ immediate imprisonment substituted. The original disqualification order was rescinded and replaced by 18 months’ disqualification running from 7 May 2026.

1. Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): Leave was granted. The appeal was allowed as to the custodial term, which was reduced from ten months to six months’ immediate imprisonment. The disqualification order was also replaced by an 18-month order running from 7 May 2026.
2. Crown Court at Leicester: Following a guilty plea and committal from Leicester Magistrates’ Court, His Honour Judge Raynor sentenced the applicant on 7 May 2026 to ten months’ imprisonment and disqualification for two years and five months.