I opened my mind and discovered that a horse is a member of the Perissodactyla family of odd-toed ungulates who are hindgut fermenters which means that they digest plant celluose and turn it into crap 
If your horse has made a test case out of you and you have some proof of what you are saying then post the link.
You could save many drivers a fortune who have been wrongly convicted of a drivers hours offence. Im going over the field to eat some nice tasty grass while Im waiting 
Wheel Nut:
I opened my mind and discovered that a horse is a member of the Perissodactyla family of odd-toed ungulates who are hindgut fermenters which means that they digest plant celluose and turn it into crapIf your horse has made a test case out of you and you have some proof of what you are saying then post the link.
You could save many drivers a fortune who have been wrongly convicted of a drivers hours offence. Im going over the field to eat some nice tasty grass while Im waiting
like i said āHIGH COURT LONDONā
limeyphil:
Wheel Nut:
I opened my mind and discovered that a horse is a member of the Perissodactyla family of odd-toed ungulates who are hindgut fermenters which means that they digest plant celluose and turn it into crapIf your horse has made a test case out of you and you have some proof of what you are saying then post the link.
You could save many drivers a fortune who have been wrongly convicted of a drivers hours offence. Im going over the field to eat some nice tasty grass while Im waiting
like i said āHIGH COURT LONDONā
limeyphil, WHEN were you pulled/prosecuted ?
i was pulled last year. thatās when i quizzed vosa and the police. i like proving them wrong. i know the rules have changed a little since then.
however a high court ruling sets the president and until the queen, the court of appeal or the house of lords rule different then the president stays the same.
limeyphil:
i was pulled last year. thatās when i quizzed vosa and the police. i like proving them wrong. i know the rules have changed a little since then.
however a high court ruling sets the president and until the queen, the court of appeal or the house of lords rule different then the president stays the same.
That may well be where the āconfusionā lies ?
Iām fairly sure that if you got pulled next week for the same offence, the result would be different.
dambuster:
limeyphil:
i was pulled last year. thatās when i quizzed vosa and the police. i like proving them wrong. i know the rules have changed a little since then.
however a high court ruling sets the president and until the queen, the court of appeal or the house of lords rule different then the president stays the same.That may well be where the āconfusionā lies ?
Iām fairly sure that if you got pulled next week for the same offence, the result would be different.
iām sure your right. he would be doing his duty to prosecute. but once in the magistrates court a good solicitor would quote a high court ruling and that would be that.
limeyphil:
i was pulled last year. thatās when i quizzed vosa and the police. i like proving them wrong. i know the rules have changed a little since then.
however a high court ruling sets the president and until the queen, the court of appeal or the house of lords rule different then the president stays the same.
The rules have changed, the UK is not a republic and until you can post something that proves you are correct than I will stick by the EU rules as amended in April 2007.
You cannot do a 4 + 8 resulting in a 16 hour day in road transport 
limeyphil:
dambuster:
limeyphil:
i was pulled last year. thatās when i quizzed vosa and the police. i like proving them wrong. i know the rules have changed a little since then.
however a high court ruling sets the president and until the queen, the court of appeal or the house of lords rule different then the president stays the same.That may well be where the āconfusionā lies ?
Iām fairly sure that if you got pulled next week for the same offence, the result would be different.
iām sure your right. he would be doing his duty to prosecute. but once in the magistrates court a good solicitor would quote a high court ruling and that would be that.
Until you can provide evidence of this court ruling Iāll stick to the EU regulations 
Wheel Nut:
limeyphil:
i was pulled last year. thatās when i quizzed vosa and the police. i like proving them wrong. i know the rules have changed a little since then.
however a high court ruling sets the president and until the queen, the court of appeal or the house of lords rule different then the president stays the same.The rules have changed, the UK is not a republic and until you can post something that proves you are correct than I will stick by the EU rules as amended in April 2007.
You cannot do a 4 + 8 resulting in a 16 hour day in road transport
Youāve finally got it.
we are not a republic. we are a āmonarchy with a democratic systemā
Thatās why we are different.
limeyphil:
iām sure your right. he would be doing his duty to prosecute. but once in the magistrates court a good solicitor would quote a high court ruling and that would be that.
Could you be missing the point that even a Judges Ruling (technical term) is superceded by a change in legislation ?
eg
Using a mobile, hand held mobile phone didnāt exist as an offence.
(Leaving alone the previous existing offences of careless/undue care offences)
But it does now.
the offences you list couldnāt have been superceded as they didnāt exist.
legislation is one thing.
law is another.
If someone puts a sign up saying āprivate land. keep outā. does that make it private land? no.
Just because an EU pen pusher says you canāt do this or that it doesnāt make it an offence if a judge says differently. a good solicitor will check on these things before you go to court.
this has been done. judges can see how hard it is to stick to the rules. thatās why they set presidents. it helps simplify things and reduce court waiting times.
limeyphil:
Wheel Nut:
limeyphil:
i was pulled last year. thatās when i quizzed vosa and the police. i like proving them wrong. i know the rules have changed a little since then.
however a high court ruling sets the president and until the queen, the court of appeal or the house of lords rule different then the president stays the same.The rules have changed, the UK is not a republic and until you can post something that proves you are correct than I will stick by the EU rules as amended in April 2007.
You cannot do a 4 + 8 resulting in a 16 hour day in road transport
Youāve finally got it.
we are not a republic. we are a āmonarchy with a democratic systemā
Thatās why we are different.
That is where we do agree, although for slightly different reasons
We do not have Presidents, maybe you meant to type precedent.
We are a monarchy with a Queen. She asks an elected party in parliament to govern her country. At present we are full members of the European Union and have to abide by their laws which are applicable to all member states.
However the case remains that the law was changed on 11th April 2007 by using legislation from this agreement: (EEC) No 561/2006
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Strasbourg, 15 March 2006.
For the European Parliament
The PresidentJ. BORRELL FONTELLES
H. WINKLER
Regulation (EEC) No 3820/85 is hereby repealed and replaced
by this Regulation. (EEC) No 561/2006
limeyphil:
Just because an EU pen pusher says you canāt do this or that it doesnāt make it an offence if a judge says differently.
Yes it does. The job of the judge and the rest of the legal system is NOT to make the laws but to interpret and implent them as they were at the time of the offence. The fact that the laws changed between the time of the offence and the time of the ruling in this case does not mean that the ruling has any bearing whatsoever on the new rules as the ruling was based entirely on the old rules as they are what was in force at the time of the offence. Itās nothing to do with āopening your mindā itās a simple fact of how the legal system in this country works. The UK and/or EU governments make the laws and the judges and courts interpret and implement them.
Paul
limeyphil:
This may be what some EU pen pusher wrote.
However if the high court rules differently then that sets the law.
Which it did.
like i said āopen up your mindā
Okay put your Money where your Mouth is and Prove beyond reasonable Doubt that a Driver May take an 4 hr break followed by only an 8 hr rest period and be Legal
Obviously youāve got the High Court Links for cases which came to court AFTER 11th April 2007 when the new legislation was introduced.
Iāll happily put Ā£50 in any Charity Box of your Choice if you can Prove that I am wrong in saying its 3hrs + 9 hrs for split shift and 4+ 8 is not permitted under EU Rules.
Are you prepared to Match meā ā ?
Davey Driver:
limeyphil:
This may be what some EU pen pusher wrote.
However if the high court rules differently then that sets the law.
Which it did.
like i said āopen up your mindāOkay put your Money where your Mouth is and Prove beyond reasonable Doubt that a Driver May take an 4 hr break followed by only an 8 hr rest period and be Legal
Obviously youāve got the High Court Links for cases which came to court AFTER 11th April 2007 when the new legislation was introduced.
Iāll happily put Ā£50 in any Charity Box of your Choice if you can Prove that I am wrong in saying its 3hrs + 9 hrs for split shift and 4+ 8 is not permitted under EU Rules.
Are you prepared to Match meā ā ?
I will double your fifty quid Davey, so 100 quid to LPās favorite charity if as you say some old goat has judged the rules differently.
So Limeyphil open your wallet instead of your mind
Actually I would prefer phils money to go here. 
Malc, i havnt agreed to the new rules, ir discounted themā¦so please do not refer to me as Some old goat or i may have to send the judge round, know what i mean.ā ā
I suspect this is a wind up by limeyphil
tachograph:
I suspect this is a wind up by limeyphil
oh Bugger 
I asked that very question when stopped by the police/vosa checkpoint at the A419 junction 15 M4 Swindon around a month ago. Was told by the vosa operative the following, " the split rest still applies and a split rest period can be taking in two separate periods. the first must be more than 3 hours and the second more than 9 hours.
This is what i will believe, and do[/img]
audidriver:
I asked that very question when stopped by the police/vosa checkpoint at the A419 junction 15 M4 Swindon around a month ago. Was told by the vosa operative the following, " the split rest still applies and a split rest period can be taking in two separate periods. the first must be more than 3 hours and the second more than 9 hours.This is what i will believe, and do[/img]
Thats right. itās on the vosa website. 9+3 is ok.
just couldnāt resist getting peoples backs up before 