Under the Road Traffic Act 1988 s.145, drivers were required to hold valid insurance covering “the use of the vehicle” on a road or public place. Where the driver’s insurance covered the use of cars in addition to the driver’s own vehicle, the phrase “the vehicle” could not be read as meaning only the driver’s own car. Accordingly, when the driver used a friend’s car with their permission, and was covered under his own policy to do so, that car became “the vehicle” for the purposes of s.145 and the policy.
In its ordinary and natural meaning, “proceedings in a criminal cause or matter” in the Justice and Security Act 2013 s.6(11) included proceedings by way of judicial review of a decision made in a criminal cause, and nothing in the context or purpose of the legislation suggested a different meaning.
A prison governor’s decision that a prisoner serving a mandatory life sentence should attend a court hearing by video link rather than in person did not breach ECHR art.6, and the prison had not fettered its discretion.
The High Court granted a local authority an injunction to restrain illegal street cruising in its local area.
The Serious Fraud Office was entitled to a civil recovery order under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 in respect of £4.4 million held in a UK bank account representing the proceeds of sale of the defendant’s shares in a Canadian company which had provided corrupt inducements to foreign officials. The defendant had acquired the shares at a nominal price as part of the company’s corrupt arrangements to induce Chadian officials, including her husband, to procure the grant of oil production rights in Chad.