(1)(b)

A conviction for causing danger to road users by interfering with a motor vehicle contrary to the Road Traffic Act 1988 s.22A(1)(b) was quashed where the judge had mistakenly told the jury that it could convict if it was sure that the accused, who was a passenger in a taxi, had interfered with the driver of the vehicle, rather than the vehicle itself.

[2014] EWCA Crim 417

In a case where the defendant alleged that a charge of wounding with intent was based on the victim’s false allegations, the judge had been correct to refuse defence counsel permission to cross-examine the victim about false allegations he had allegedly made in the past against his mother; those allegations did not have “substantial probative value” in relation to a matter in issue for the purposes of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 s.100(1)(b).

[2012] EWCA Crim 2728