Not in accordance7/28/2023 ![]() ![]() Proceedings for an offence mentioned in the Schedule are not specified if the defendant is charged under s.37(7)(d) Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE 1984) or the defendant is less than 16 years old at the time when a summons or requisition is issued in respect of the offence - S.3(1A and B) Prosecution of Offences Act 1985. received for the purposes of considering whether there are grounds for mitigating the normal consequences of a conviction under s.35(1) Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 (RTOA 1988) (disqualification for repeated offences). ![]() read out before the court under s.12(7) MCA 1980 (non-appearance of accused: plea of guilty) or. ![]() received in proceedings held in the absence of the accused - s.11(1) MCA 1980 proof in absence.Proceedings cease to be specified if a magistrates' court begins to receive evidence in those proceedings other than evidence that is: The effect is that the duty of the Director of Public Prosecutions to take over the conduct of all criminal proceedings instituted on behalf of a police force will not include a duty to take over specified proceedings. The Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 (Specified Proceedings) Order 1999 specifies proceedings for the offences set out in the Schedule (see Annex B) for the purposes of s.3 Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 if those proceedings are commenced by the prosecution so as to give an opportunity of pleading guilty by post under s.12 Magistrates' Courts Act 1980 (MCA 1980). Public interest factors which relate to particular offences will be dealt with below. Some 'routine' prosecutions, for example under the Construction and Use Regulations and related provisions of the Road Traffic Act (RTA) 1988, may have special significance for the traffic commissioners when dealing with licensing applications from heavy goods vehicle operators.The prosecution of traffic offences is vital to the enforcement and promotion of road safety and the protection of the public, and.When determining the public interest in prosecuting minor road traffic offences, it must be borne in mind that: For many offenders their prosecution will be their only experience of criminal law enforcement. Many road traffic offences are minor in nature. Road Traffic - Drug and Drink Driving OffencesĬode for Crown Prosecutors - Public Interest Considerations.This guidance is provided to provide an overview on procedure and charging practice that is not dealt with in the existing road traffic guidance being Annex B: Specified Proceedings (Offences).Annex A: National Protocol for the Production and Inspection of Driving Documents.Tachograph Cases and Public Interest Criteria.Power to Prohibit the Driving of UK Vehicles - Section 99A.Falsification of Driver's Hours and Records - s.99(5).Offences in Contravention of the Regulations - s.96.Charging Practice - Forgery and False Information, etc.Driving/Obtaining a Driving Licence Whilst Disqualified.Self-balancing Personal Transporters - Segway etc.Restoration of Summary Offences after Trial on Indictment.Code for Crown Prosecutors - Public Interest Considerations.We can comply with the rules, or we can conform to the rules. Perhaps it depends whether the writer feels "accordance" is more related like "compliance" or "conformance". My dictionary lists "accordant to" and "accordant with" as possibilities, as well as "accordance with", but not "accordance to". ![]() With graphs or lists of data I noticed the usage "in accordance to" where I would have used "according to", as in "We are listing the participants according to age" written as "in accordance to age". For example, I found a few articles where the phrase "in accordance with" was used many, many times, and "in accordance to" only once, in the exact same context! I also found many cases where the two were used interchangeably in the same context, indicating that the writer saw no difference at all in meaning between the two. Other uses of "in accordance to" appear to be slips. Some of the uses of "in accordance to" are incorrect substitutes for "according to", and these seem to include some non-native writers as well. Google up both at the same time: "in accordance to" "in accordance with" and you'll find some interesting cases. Otherwise, use "in accordance with", regardless of what you see through Google. Following the lead of MountainHiker here, I would recommend using "in accordance to" when "accordance" means "granting". ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply.AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |