(1)If a person causes the death of another person by driving a mechanically propelled vehicle on a road or other public place without due care and attention, or without reasonable consideration for other persons using the road or place, and—
(a)he is, at the time when he is driving, unfit to drive through drink or drugs, or
(b)he has consumed so much alcohol that the proportion of it in his breath, blood or urine at that time exceeds the prescribed limit, or
(ba)he has in his body a specified controlled drug and the proportion of it in his blood or urine at that time exceeds the specified limit for that drug, or
(c)he is, within 18 hours after that time, required to provide a specimen in pursuance of section 7 of this Act, but without reasonable excuse fails to provide it, or
(d)he is required by a constable to give his permission for a laboratory test of a specimen of blood taken from him under section 7A of this Act, but without reasonable excuse fails to do so,
he is guilty of an offence.
(2)For the purposes of this section a person shall be taken to be unfit to drive at any time when his ability to drive properly is impaired.
(3)Subsection (1)(b) , (ba) , (c) and (d) above shall not apply in relation to a person driving a mechanically propelled vehicle other than a motor vehicle.
Cases considering section 3A 10
[2023] EWCA Crim 1023 · 8 September 2023
The court applied the sentencing Guideline to the section 3A offences and held that the starting category had to reflect combined alcohol and drug toxicity separately from driving carelessness. (see paras [39]; [45]-[55])
The court considered the sentence imposed for the alcohol-limit variant of the offence as one of four concurrent counts. It corrected the Guideline categorisation applicable to those sentences. (see paras [2]; [42]-[55])
The court confirmed that the pre-existing sentencing Guideline remained properly applicable to the prescribed-drug-limit offence, although that offence had been added after the Guideline was issued. (see para [39])
[2009] EWCA Crim 1452 · 14 July 2009Limits
The court treated the opening words as requiring proof that careless driving caused death. The prosecution had to prove that common element and one of the alternative paragraphs which followed it. (see paras [5]; [28]-[30])
The court treated paragraph (a) as a form of the offence in which unfitness through drink or drugs must be proved. That contrast supported limiting section 15 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 to drink-or-drug forms of the offence. (see paras [28]; [33]-[35])
The court treated paragraph (b) as a form of the offence in which the prescribed alcohol limit must be proved. That contrast supported limiting section 15 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 to drink-or-drug forms of the offence. (see paras [28]; [33]-[35])
The court applied paragraph (c) as requiring careless driving causing death and a failure, without reasonable excuse, to provide a specimen when required. It held that proof of intoxication or alcohol level was not an element of this form of the offence. (see paras [5]; [28]-[30])
The court treated paragraph (d), like paragraph (c), as a specimen-failure form of the offence which does not require proof of drink, drugs or alcohol level. Its later introduction reinforced the conclusion that section 15 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 did not apply. (see paras [33]-[35])
[2003] EWCA Crim 996 · 3 April 2003
The court treated causing death by careless driving while under the influence of drink or drugs as subject to the same four sentencing categories as death by dangerous driving. (see [8]; [34])
What each judgment says about section 3A is in the case-law panel in the full Act.