Missed car tax payment, fined by DVLA

Joe_Horner

Rover_Driver wrote: »

There have been Road Traffic Act cases revolving around the meaning of the word 'using' within that legislation, but it is not relevant to V.E.R.A matters.

It doesn't matter if it is being used, available to be used, just parked or kept on a public road, and unlicensed, it is a specific V.E.R.A. offence and nothing to do with R.T.A. matters.

So, you hold to Humpty's argument that "When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean, nothing more nor less"?

Fortunately the courts (and writers of dictionaries) tend not to take that view and only distinguish meanings in different circumstances where it's imperative to do so. Which, in this case, it's not.

In matters like this (the meaning of words) case law isn't restricted to the particular Act, or provision within an Act, which is considered. If a definition is applicable then it's generally applicable, at least across broadly related matters.

I grant you that the definition of "use" in this case may not be applicable to, say, a 12 gauge shotgun under the Firearms Act, but legal requirements wrt vehicles on the road (tax, insurance, MOT, roadworthy condition etc) are related closely enough for different definitions across them to be nonsensical. Indeed, that was one of the very points made in Pumbien regarding the meaning in relation to insurance and MOT (entirely different offences despite being held in the same Act)

Rover_Driver

The RTA definition of the word 'use', and what is accepted by the courts, applies to Road Traffic Act matters.
eg. Insurance is required 'in relation to the use of the vehicle', that is what is accepted as being 'available for use' etc.




It is not relevant to The Vehicles Excise & Registration Act matters because it is written into the act that a motor vehicle that is used - in any sense of the word - or kept on a public road, is required to be licensed.