Notice of intended prosecution in road traffic cases
Produced in partnership with Red Lion Chambers

The following Corporate Crime practice note produced in partnership with Red Lion Chambers provides comprehensive and up to date legal information covering:

  • Notice of intended prosecution in road traffic cases
  • The requirement to notify in road traffic cases
  • Fulfilling the requirements under RTOA 1988, s1
  • Warning
  • Notice to the driver in road traffic offences
  • Waiver of a failure to comply with RTOA 1988, s 1
  • Reasonable diligence
  • Errors in the notice
  • When the notice applies
  • Exceptions
  • More...

Notice of intended prosecution in road traffic cases

A notice of intended prosecution (NIP) is a notification, usually by the police, that a prosecution is being considered against an individual.

The purpose of the notice is to enable the individual to have chance to gather evidence for their case.

The requirement to notify in road traffic cases

The Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 (RTOA 1988), s 1 requires that for certain offences:

  1. the defendant must have been warned at the time of the possibility of prosecution for the offence, or

  2. the defendant must have been served with the summons within 14 days of the offence, or

  3. notice of the possibility of the prosecution must have been sent by the prosecutor within 14 days of the offence wither to the driver or to the registered keeper of the vehicle.

Fulfilling the requirements under RTOA 1988, s1

It is sufficient that any one of the requirements of RTOA 1988, s 1 is fulfilled so if the defendant is adequately warned at the time, there is no need for a notice. Many police forces send notices in all cases regardless of whether there has been a warning at the time out of an abundance of caution but it is not strictly necessary. See Sheild v Crighton [1974] Crim LR 605 (not reported by LexisNexis®).

If none of the requirements under RTOA 1988, s 1 are fulfilled, there cannot be

Related documents:

Popular documents