When someone dies as a result of a road traffic collision that was caused by a speeding driver, the driver who was responsible for causing the death or fatal injury will usually be prosecuted in the criminal courts, and their speed will be an important factor in determining whether they should be convicted for causing death by careless or dangerous driving. Where the speeding driver also dies as a result of the collision, a criminal prosecution cannot take place, because there is no-one to prosecute. In such cases, the deceased driver’s speed and manner of driving will be determined by the coroner in reaching a conclusion and returning a verdict relating to the cause of both the driver’s and their injured victim’s cause of death. The cause of the fatally injured person’s death will be determined by the coroner based upon the evidence presented by witnesses and experts at an inquest. The coroner can reach one of three verdicts: road traffic collision, unlawful killing or an open verdict. Their conclusion or verdict cannot attribute blame or specifically name any individual person as responsible, but must remain impartial and factual based on when, where and how the deceased died. The deceased’s death cannot be registered until the inquest is complete. What does an inquest verdict of unlawful killing mean? In English law, a coroner can return a verdict or conclusion of 'unlawful killing' when someone has been killed without lawful excuse and in breach of criminal law. The use of this verdict is restricted to murder, manslaughter (including gross negligence manslaughter) and infanticide. In cases where the death was caused by somebody’s driving, for an unlawful killing conclusion to be reached, the coroner has to be satisfied that either the criteria for gross negligence manslaughter are met, or that a vehicle has been used as a weapon of assault and was deliberately driven at the person who died. A conclusion of unlawful killing is not reached simply by satisfying the legal criteria for the criminal offences of causing death by dangerous driving or causing death by careless driving. What is gross negligence manslaughter? Gross negligence manslaughter occurs in circumstances where a potential offence of murder is reduced to manslaughter because the guilty person did not have the necessary ‘murderous intent’ for the crime of murder to be applied. Other reasons for a potential offence of murder to be reduced to gross negligence manslaughter include diminished responsibility or loss of control/provocation. Gross negligence manslaughter is committed if ALL of the following criteria are met: A duty of care based on the ordinary principles of negligence was owed to the deceased. There was a breach of that duty of care. The risk of death (not just serious injury) was reasonably foreseeable and reasonable for the consequence of the misconduct. The breach caused the deceased’s death. Given the risk of death involved, the misconduct was so ‘grossly negligent’ as to be condemned as the serious crime of manslaughter. All of the above elements must be proved beyond reasonable doubt (criminal law standard) and must relate to the actions or omissions of one identifiable person which caused or significantly contributed towards the deceased person’s death. Driving cases may amount to gross negligence manslaughter if the driver’s driving was sufficiently bad and all elements of gross negligence manslaughter can be proved. Each case depends on its own facts. Can a coroner return a verdict of unlawful killing when death is caused by speeding driver? A coroner can return a verdict (or reach a conclusion) of unlawful killing in a fatal road collision case if they are sure that unlawful killing has been proved on the evidence and that all elements of the crime of gross negligence manslaughter are proved, beyond reasonable doubt. A conclusion of unlawful killing is rare in cases where death has been caused in a road traffic collision. It is reserved for truly abhorrent driving cases. If there is not enough evidence to prove unlawful killing according to the necessary standard in a fatal road collision case, then the conclusion will be road traffic collision. The coroner will usually provide a short-form conclusion, but may record a brief narrative if appropriate, such as where a case of bad driving falls short of manslaughter. The coroner’s narrative conclusion can help the bereaved family understand why the outcome of the inquest is appropriate for the events that have taken place. Any narrative conclusion must be brief, neutral and factual regarding issues which are central to the cause of death and must not express any judgement or opinion. Unlawful killing verdict after speeding driver caused pregnant woman’s death Boyes Turner’s personal injury solicitors represented the family of a young pregnant mother who was tragically killed after her car was struck from behind by a speeding driver, who also died a few days later. We used dashcam footage and expert evidence to prove the speed and manner of the defendant’s driving in the moments immediately before his vehicle collided with our client’s car at a speed of over 100mph. Prior to the collision he had already overtaken a succession of vehicles for at least a mile, at speeds in excess of 130 mph (more than double the speed limit) in very heavy rain and poor visibility, whilst crossing solid double white lines into the overtaking lane of the opposite carriageway. The coroner described the defendant’s driving as “aggressive, audacious and abhorrent”. Read more about the inquest and the family’s fatal injury claim. Watch our video about this case here. If you or a family member have suffered severe injury which was caused by someone else’s negligence, you can talk to a solicitor, free and confidentially, for advice about rehabilitation and making a claim by contacting us.
