Leah Hester
In motoring law, not every offence justifies the punishment that would ordinarily follow. The law recognises that even when an offence is committed, the full picture can justify leniency.
That was exactly the issue in a recent case we handled at Huntingdon Magistrates’ Court, where our client had been caught travelling at 94mph in a 60mph zone. With 6 existing penalty points on his licence, he faced a further 6 points and automatic disqualification under the “totting up” provisions.
At first glance, this may have seemed like a textbook speeding case, but when the full circumstances were explored, the picture looked very different.
Our client was driving when his work colleague and front seat passenger suddenly began choking on some popcorn. The road in question was a fast but narrow single-lane A-road with no hard shoulder and no available laybys – an unsafe place to stop at the best of times, let alone in an emergency. Out of genuine and urgent concern for his passenger’s welfare, our client accelerated to locate a suitable and safe place to pull over.
We argued that these facts amounted to “special reasons” – a legal principle that allows the court to exercise discretion and avoid imposing the usual penalty.
The Sentencing Guidelines provide that the period of disqualification may be reduced or avoided if there are special reasons (Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988, s.34(1)) The legal test for a special reasons argument was set out in R v Wickens [1958] 42 Cr App R 436 (CA).
The court held that a special reason must:
- be a mitigating or extenuating circumstance;
- not amount in law to a defence to the charge;
- be directly connected with the commission of the offence; and
- be one that the court ought properly to take into account when imposing sentence.
In the above case, the magistrates accepted that this threshold was met and imposed an absolute discharge – an extremely rare result for an offence of this kind.
What Counts as a Special Reason?
Over the years, we’ve successfully advanced special reasons arguments in a number of challenging cases. These arguments are highly fact-sensitive and require precise legal presentation, meticulous preparation, and often expert evidence.
Below is another example:
Representing a Police Officer Charged with Dangerous Driving
We were instructed to act for a serving police officer charged with dangerous driving after going through a red light while emergency equipment (blue lights and sirens) was active. At the time, the officer had arrested a violent domestic abuse suspect and was transporting him to custody. The officer believed his use of emergency road exemptions was lawful. However, the prosecution questioned the speed at which he went through the red light.
The professional consequences for our client were severe. A conviction would almost certainly have led to gross misconduct findings and the end of a career he was deeply passionate about.
We instructed an independent expert to assess the driving and submitted detailed defence representations to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), seeking a plea to the lesser offence of careless driving. The CPS initially refused.
We did not give up. With a persistent and methodical approach, we submitted two further rounds of written submissions, supported by expert evidence and case law. Eventually, the CPS accepted a plea to careless driving.
We then presented a special reasons argument at sentencing. The court was persuaded that the unique facts of the case justified departing from the usual penalty. The officer received a fine only, avoiding any disqualification or endorsement. Ultimately, the internal misconduct process resulted in a written warning, and the officer remained in post.
The High Bar for Success
It’s important to stress that not every mitigating situation qualifies as a special reason. Courts deal with many of these arguments and are rightly cautious. Whilst the legal burden on the defendant to establish special reasons is on the balance of probabilities, in practice, courts require very strong evidence, making this standard challenging to meet. [JG1] Take, for example, a driver who was intoxicated through drink or drugs and claims they drove only because of a medical emergency. While that may sound compelling, courts usually reject these arguments reasoning that the driver should have called a taxi or an ambulance, rather than taking matters into their own hands.
This is why technical legal skill and careful case management are critical. Special reasons arguments are notoriously finely balanced, and success depends not only on the facts but on the way those facts are presented, supported, and framed within the legal test.
Special Reasons vs. Exceptional Hardship – What is the Difference?
Whilst both special reasons and exceptional hardship applications can help a defendant avoid disqualification, they are legally distinct and serve different purposes:
- A special reasons application relates to the circumstances of the offence itself. It applies when the court accepts that, although an offence was committed, there were unusual or mitigating factors directly connected to the offence that justify avoiding the usual penalty (such as penalty points or disqualification).
- In contrast, an exceptional hardship application is focused on the personal consequences to the defendant, or others, if disqualification were to follow. This might include, for example, the loss of employment, inability to care for dependents, or serious medical hardship. It does not excuse the offence, it asks the court to consider whether the punishment would be disproportionately harsh.
The two arguments operate on different legal foundations and require different evidence and preparation. In some cases, both may be considered, but they must not be confused.
Need Advice?
If you are facing a motoring prosecution and believe your case involves exceptional or emergency circumstances, we may be able to help.
We have years of experience in advancing successful special reasons and exceptional hardship arguments, working with some of the country’s leading specialist barristers and experts. From early advice through to representation in court, we provide an end-to-end service designed to give you the strongest chance of success.
Contact LMP Legal to discuss your case in confidence.
Want to read more?
Sentencing Careless Driving: The Latest Guidelines
Making the System Work: Expert Advocacy for Autistic Clients. – Chronicle Law – Your Legal News