A failure to serve a certificate of blood analysis on the defendant within the period prescribed by s.16(1) Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 rendered the certificate inadmissible and the court could not accept hearsay evidence as to the origin of a blood specimen.Appeal by way of case stated against the conviction of the defendant ('W') on 13 September 2002 for driving a motor vehicle whilst the level of alcohol in his blood exceeded the prescribed limit. The only evidence that W had been served with a certificate of blood analysis within the prescribed period of not more than seven days before his hearing as required by s.16(1) Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 was hearsay evidence supplied by a police sergeant. In addition, the only evidence as to the origin of a blood specimen sought to be relied upon was the hearsay evidence of an analyst's certificate. On the present appeal, W argued that: (i) the absence of any evidence other than hearsay evidence that the certificate had been served meant that the certificate was inadmissible; (ii) the absence of any evidence other than hearsay evidence as to the origin of the blood specimen rendered that specimen inadmissible; and (iii) therefore his conviction should be set aside.HELD: (1) The certificate was inadmissible as there had been a failure to comply with s.16(1) of the Act. (2) The specimen of blood was inadmissible as the only evidence as to its origin was hearsay evidence.Conviction set aside. Case not remitted to the Magistrates Court.

0 comments… add one

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Skip to toolbar