Mark,
I can see no problemo with that but as always there is a however..........
Should you get stopped and checked driving an UK registred car on a pull as it were, Producing the one of your many licences from abroad would be in order as far as I can see. Should you be a disq. driver in the UK, the Cops might pick you up on a PNC check and you would probably get prosecuted for producing an instrument (i.e. a foreign Driving Licence) with intent to decieve and dependant on the bloody-mindedness of the Officer get charged with an offence of attempting to pervert the course of justice as a worse case scenario and obstruct Police in the best case scenario.
I once represented a diver (no "r" intended he had webbed feet) on a disq driving rap ("r" intended), He had an UK passport and a Middle East Licence, he produced this when stopped and although superficially entitled to drive failed a PNC check.
DVLA will have a record of our UK driving entitlement (and in any endorsable prosecution this is always checked) so technically even though you can't find your UK licence you "have" a UK licence.(IYKWIM).
I will consult my Stones in work on Monday (Stones as in big heavy book - the one they throw at you not as in small rocky objects, Ginger Ale etc etc.)
|
Or Jagger and Richards? (grin)
I wrote before about local car-hire bods sending details back to britain...
Author: ian (cape town) (168.209.97.---)
Date: 07-11-01 00:39
I believe this works the other way too.
I hear (locally) that the car hire firms are sick of getting speeding and parking tickets from overseas tourists, and finding that when they try to recover said fines (via credit card machines) that the request for payment is rejected.
As a result, they are informing the foreign licensing authorities of the driver's details and the offence(s) and letting things take their course.
I was told of an English visitor who was then tracked down and given points on his license, sufficient to get him a ban!
This story may be just pub gossip, but it has a certain ring of truth to it.>
any ideas, m'learned friend?
|
Ian,
Nasty.
There was an attempt, I have no idea if it was successful or not, to pass a law where a tourist could be prosecuted in the UK for his behaviour abroad, specifically Thailand. Clear this was aimed at punishing the "sex tourist" who is going to Thailand to indulge in stuff he can't in the UK.
Seemingly an admirable idea.
However, what about being prosecuted in an Arab country for drinking in the UK ?
What about being prosecuted in a country with a national speed limit of 60 (say) because you did 70 in a country who did not ?
Or "drink driving" prosecuted in a country with limit x, even though you did it in country y which had a higher limit.
Jurisdiction is there for a reason, and trying to cross it for one-off issues is a nasty business.
I suspect that the law failed for this reason.
The US INS threw an employee of mine out of the US for failing a drug test and removed his visa. He was dutch and had been in the US for 3 days. He had smoked dope in Holland where it is legal. (tests for dope are good upto about 6 weeks).
Outrageous and almost certainly unlawful since they were not able to prove a crime. That's US immigration for you. However, you can see where it might lead.
Mark.
|
I think the (rumoured) offence was for speeding - holiday time here is a favourite for the cameras to be out to nail the tourists...
BTW, a bizarre legal case here this week (nothing to do with motoring, sorry Mart!) - Human Rights gone silly!
Judge Siraj Desai had on Tuesday granted an order to remove - by force if necessary - a bullet from Sizwe Gaqa's leg which police would then send away for ballistic tests.
It is believed the order is the first of its kind in international legal history.
Gaqa is being held in connection with an armed robbery in Bellville on New Year's Eve in which two men, Mabona Boesman and Boxer Bangani, were shot dead.
Police investigations have revealed that Boesman had shot and wounded one of his attackers before he died.
Gaqa had been given 24 hours, until 11am on Tuesday, to consent to the operation to remove the bullet from his leg, failing which Justice Desai would give the police permission to use "reasonable force" - including surgery by a qualified doctor - to remove the bullet.
By 11.08am Gaqa was still holding out on his decision and the sheriff of the court signed the consent form on his behalf.
But, as a large media contingent waited anxiously at Tygerberg Hospital for the operation to start, news of the pending interdict filtered through.
The matter was set to be heard in the High Court at 2pm.
Tygerberg Hospital clinical manager, Dr Richard Muller, said: "Tygerberg Hospital must comply with the original court order and we will carry on with the preparations. But if the order is given to stop, then we will stop the procedure."
The unexpected twist gave rise to some interesting scenarios. What would happen if Gaqa had already been cut open and the urgent interdict were granted?
Would the doctors sew him back up and leave the bullet where it was lodged?
Back in the High Court, counsel for Gaqa slugged it out with representatives of the state as to the merits of the court order to remove the bullet in question.
Jan Marais, for Gaqa, argued that the operation would be an "irreparable violation of his client's dignity and human rights".
He argued that the urgent interdict should be granted to allow Gaqa to exercise his right to appeal the original court order.
Marais said it was imperative that "these issues be re-canvassed and tested by another court (on appeal) because this judgment will be far-reaching and set a precedent".
Jacobus Olivier, for the state, argued that it was in the interests of both the police and Gaqa himself to consent to the operation.
"If Gaqa is innocent, as he maintains, the removal of the bullet and the subsequent ballistic tests will exonerate him," he said.
"He will also be receiving proper medical treatment to remove the bullet and prevent possible copper poisoning.
"There has been no objection from (Gaqa's) counsel to the possible benefits of the operation to his client," said Olivier.
"He lies there full of bullet holes and the point of this whole exercise is to remove a bullet from one of these holes."
Olivier further argued that to wait for the outcome of an appeal could take anywhere between one year and eighteen months and could "render the bullet useless".
He said that during this time, the body's chemistry could erode the bullet and affect its unique characteristics.
But Olivier was stopped in his tracks by Justice Desai when he made a reference to the double killing, saying: Boesman en Bangani het in die straat gele met hul harsings uitgeskiet ("Boesman and Bangani lay in the street with their brains blown out").
Justice Desai injected a lighter tone to the proceedings when he likened Gaqa's refusal to consent to the operation to a Shakespearian character "from Macbeth": "He doth protest too much," Justice Desai quipped.
Marais interjected and pointed out, to sniggers in the courtroom, that the quote ("The lady doth protest too much, methinks") was from Hamlet.
In a final flourish, Marais asked: "What is dignity worth? How can you possibly quantify (a person's) dignity ... how do you buy that back?"
In reply to Justice Desai's question as to whether the price was too high, Marais replied: "The price is far too high."
In the end, Justice Desai ruled that the pursuit of justice and public interest in the matter demanded a speedy
resolution which held sway even over the rights of Gaqa to privacy, dignity and bodily integrity.
The bullet was finally removed in a half-hour operation late on Tuesday afternoon.
Police spokesperson Wicus Holtzhausen said the bullet would now be sent away to the police's forensic laboratory for ballistic tests.
Gaqa was taken back to the Bellville police station cells where he remains in custody.
|
|
|
|
Ian
Yes I've got to agree this would seem to be a good bar room story. Its a question of juritistiction. Can you imagine DVLA getting a slack handful of parking fines from South Africa, what would they do with them? Absolutely sod all! In any event in this country non payment of a parking ticket becomes a civil debt. Each country has its own laws although some coutries are based around civil law. Once you are out of the country you are untouchable especially for minor traffic offences. However if you return it could be a case of " Will you just step this way sir/madam".
Mark mentioned in a previous posting what would happen in this country if he had committed an offence and produced a foreign licence. All I will say is this. Should someone from another country be treated less harshly than a UK resident, for a like offence, just because it becomes an administrative headache for the Police? Compare our system to that in some European countries where it seems UK citizens are treated as fair game and are subject to some extremely harsh penalties.
Regarding the question of being disqualified on a UK licence but producing a non UK licence. It must be remembered that disqualification is a punishment handed out by the courts for either a serious offence or as a result of a number of less serious offences - totting up. It therefore goes without saying that to continue to drive shows a total disregard and contempt for the punishment received. I would therefore submit that a Police Officer is entitled to invoke more serious charges ( " bloody- mindednes " ). Not forgetting that they would also not be covered by insurance if they had hired a UK car.
Ian, love the storey about the bullet. Home from home. mind you the legal profession would have made an absolute killing ( pardon the pun ). Sorry Pugugly nothing personal. I do enjoy your very knowledgable contributions.
Andrew.
|
|
|
|
|
mmmmmmmm, an Urban rumour perhaps (?) I've not come accross this yet, I would challange on the grounds of jurisdictional issues alone, certainly outside Europe and I can feel a bout of Human Rghts coming on...... (Fair Trial ).
|
|
|
|
Should add, Foreign Nationals (apart from EU Nationals) can drive on their home licences for a period of 12 months in the UK, thereafter must apply for a UK (provisional) licence. It used to be the same for EU Nationals whereby they had to excahnge their licence within 12 months, this has now changed and they don't have to. So in my opinion, Mark, you can drive on any number of the licences you have and produce them to the Police if requested but remember they would check your UK licence record in any enquiry.
|
|
|
Ian
Very interesting but our Road Traffic Acts (as yet) have no effect on South Africa and vice versa, so a UK visitor to your country falling foul of your speeding laws would attract no endorsement/PP's on his Licence here.
As for EEC I understand the same applies but being muted an EEC Licence and harmonisation on penalties.
DVD
|
|
Thnx DVD - as mentioned, it was one of those pub gossip things - we know that MRs Hertz and Avis have a major problem with tourists and fines, so there was an element of "could-be-true" to it.
|
|
|
|
Don't misunderstand me, I totally believe that the law of the land you are in should apply. Please god. I couldn't cope with brazilian laws in the UK.
However, I don't have a UK Licence, and even if I get a duplicate it is addressed somewhere I don't live.
My point above was that the law of the land should apply, and only the law of the land, not the law of some other land.
|
|
I can see the gov't of Thailand (and indeed the Philippines where I live) going after pedophiles across borders and so they should. Rightly, because they are plagued by foreign perverts masquerading as tourists, and where I live pedophilia is a capital offense. However, I doubt most countries could be bothered with the arcane niceties of minor (to them) motoring rules infractions elsewhere if they were asked to pursue their nationals/residents by another country!
|
|
|
|
Indeed, so they should. And they should be extradited back to Thailand and prosecuted under That law to the fullest extent and punished forever.
However, they shouldn't be prosecuted in another country under another country's law if the offence was in Thailand.
|
What is scarey is that there is legistlation out there already (ok ok for War Crimes and the such like.) as the world shrinks I think we can expect our Lords and Masters to chase us accross frontiers.
By the way I with Milosivich on the Jurisdiction issues at the The Hague, basically you can be arrested in you own country and extradited to a third Country and tried in a Court financed largely by American Corporations........
|
|
It doesn't make him any less guilty though.
|
|
|
|
