Expert evidence based on tests conducted on a specific defendant as to the rate of absorption and elimination of alcohol from that defendant's blood is inadmissible under s.49(6) of the Road Safety Act 1986 in proceedings for an offence under s.49(1)(f), even where tendered to support a defence under s.49(4) that the breath analysing instrument was not in proper working order or properly operated. DPP v Phung is overruled. The s.49(4) defence remains available but must be established by other means, such as comparison with a blood test under s.55(10) or cross-examination of the instrument operator.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 5 later cases that cite this judgment.