Dangerous Driving Charge on A90 at Aberdeen Sheriff Court. The client was charged with dangerous driving on the A90 due to excessive speed. The penalties for dangerous driving include automatic disqualification for at least one year. Following trial the Court was persuaded to reduce the charge from dangerous driving to careless driving, which attracted a much reduced penalty.
Dominic Sellar has appeared in thousands of cases. What follows is a selection of cases that reflects his experience in the area of road traffic law. Although personal details have been omitted each case is verifiable. Most of the cases arose during Dominic Sellar’s employment with another firm.
Dangerous Driving Charge on A9 at Inverness Sheriff Court. The client was charged with dangerous driving on the A9 due to excessive speed. The penalties for dangerous driving include automatic disqualification for at least one year. Following discussions the charge was reduced to a speeding charge. The client still faced disqualification due to the high speed. However, having regard to his references and circumstances the court was persuade to deal with the matter by way of penalty points. The client kept his driving licence.
Speeding Case at Coatbridge JP Court. Our clients speed had been recorded on a Unipar SL 700 Speed Detection Device. He faced disqualification due to the high speed. We were able to persuade the Crown to accept that his speed was lower than that recorded by the police. The charge was changed to a lower speed and the client avoided disqualification.
Speeding Case at Glasgow JP Court. Our client works as a taxi driver and his driving licence is clearly essential to his employment. He had been charged with speeding, but the case took something to come before the court. We identified a preliminary issue which related to service of his court papers and time-bar of the court proceedings. The issue proceeded to a evidential debate at court. The court upheld our argument and dismissed the case.
Speeding Case at Coatbridge Jp Court. Having been recorded on a Unipar SL700 Speed Detection Device our client faced disqualification under the totting-up provisions. At the Trial Diet we identified a technical issue with the Crown case. As a result the case was dismissed and our client kept his licence.
Careless Driving Charge at Dumfries JP court. Our client was charged with careless driving following a minor incident near Dumfries town centre. He denied the charge and having carried out some initial enquiries we were able to make representations to the Crown. As a consequence the case was dropped by the Crown and no further proceedings were taken.
Careless Driving Case at Edinburgh JP Court. The client was charged with careless driving (section 3, Road Traffic Act 1988) following an accident were it was alleged that he had driven into the back of another car on a country road outside of Edinburgh. We were able to create a doubt about the allegation and establish that his driving had not fallen below the acceptable standard. The case was dismissed.
Our client was charged with driving without insurance at Glasgow JP Court. The offence carries 6 to 8 penalty points and possible disqualification. We presented a successful defence at a Special Reasons Proof on the basis that our client has a genuine and honest belief that he was insured to drive. As a consequence no penalty points were endorsed on our clients driving licence.
Failing to Stop or Report Accident (Section 170 Road Traffic Act 1988). Our client was charged with failing to stop at the scene of an accident or report the matter to the police. The Client accepted responsibility for the accident and sought our help to sort things out and get the best outcome. We sought early resolution and negotiated a plea with the prosecutor whereby our client pled guilty to only one of the three charges. Penalty Points were imposed and disqualification was avoided.
Mobile Phone Case at Hamilton JP Court. Mr Sellar represented a driver who was charged with using a mobile phone. The driver accepted that he had the phone in his hand, but his position was that he was simply moving it from his jacket pocket. However, the police gave evidence that that they saw him moving his thumb over the face of the phone suggesting that he was “using” the phone to text. He was found Not Guilty after trial.