John s/o Mhanze, Crim. Rev. 13-D-69, 1/2/69, Duff J.

 

John s/o Mhanze, Crim. Rev. 13-D-69, 1/2/69, Duff J.

The accused, a driver, was convicted, inter alia of driving a motor vehicle without insurance c/s 4 (1) and (2) Motor Vehicle (Insurance) Ordinance, Cap. 169. An order of disqualification followed, the period fixed being one of twelve months in addition to a fine of Shs. 50/-.

Held: “It has been stated on many occasions that it is undesirable that ht police should charge a driver who could not be expected to an did not know of his liability when a vehicle was uninsured against third party risks. The owner and employer can always be presumed to know the law as to third party insurance and he is the person who should invariably be prosecuted and who should, if fund guilty, be dealt with adequately … it requires little imagination to envisage the likely result of a driver telling his employer that he wished to see the third party insurance policy before he could drive the vehicle, even in these days when the position of an employee is protected by legislation. In all the circumstances I don not consider that it was appropriate to make a disqualification order, and in this connection I refer the learned magistrate to the decision in R. v. John Gedeon and another, (1957) E.A. 664. The disqualification is therefore set aside and the driving licence is to be returned to the accused forthwith”.