https://doi.org/10.21697/zp.2020.20.3.12
In its judgment for this case, the Rzeszów Voivodship Administrative Court did not find grounds to abstain from the mandatory withholding of a driver’s license for exceeding the speed limit in a residential area by over 50 km per hour. The Court pointed out that speeding was not the only way to counter the threat to health and life, and therefore there was no subsidiarity of higher necessity. The defendant’s son, whose life was in danger, was not in the vehicle with him, and an ambulance had been called and was on its way to the child. The Court expressed its doubts that there was a direct threat to the child’s life and health, which also meant that the conditions of Article 102 section 1 point 1aa of the Act of 5 January 2011 on vehicle drivers were not met. When the ambulance arrived, its medical team did not confirm that the case was an emergency. The Court also observed that there was a relationship between the good the driver was protecting and the good which he put into jeopardy by driving over the speed limit. The good the defendant alleged to have saved was the life and health of the child, while the good he had in fact jeopardized was the life and health of other travelers on the road at the time. Road safety is a legal good that encompasses the protection of other people’s lives, health and property.
Download files
Citation rules
Cited by / Share
English
Italiano
Język Polski