Failing to Keep Left Unless Overtaking – Case Study

Overview

Talon Legal defended a driver accused of failing to comply with “Keep Left Unless Overtaking” (KLUO) rules on Main North Road. The incident, which involved a brief period of driving in the right lane due to congestion, was captured on police video.

After reviewing the evidence, we persuaded the prosecution that the charges were excessive and that the client’s driving was safe, reasonable, and consistent with the operational purpose of the road rules.

Challenge

The client faced two charges:

1. Count 1 – Driving in the right lane on a road with an 80 km/h speed limit in breach of the ARR.
2. Count 2 – Driving in the right lane where a “Keep Left Unless Overtaking” sign applied.

The charges stemmed from one continuous act of driving over a distance of approximately 300 metres. The client maintained that their actions were safe and justified given the circumstances, and we argued that the charges were unwarranted and did not serve the public interest.

Our Approach

We adopted a detailed, evidence-driven strategy to demonstrate that the client’s actions were compliant with the road rules and consistent with public safety objectives.

1. Analysing the Police Video

• We calculated that the client remained in the right lane for approximately 20 seconds, covering a distance of only 300 metres.
• The client’s ability to merge into the middle or left lanes was impeded by two SUVs in the adjacent lanes, as confirmed by timestamps in the police video.
• The video showed that the client signalled their intention to merge and did so as soon as it was safe, without causing unnecessary delays or disruptions.

2. Highlighting Operational Guidelines

• We referenced operational instructions from the Department for Infrastructure and Transport (DIT), which indicate that KLUO signs are typically not applicable to short road segments under 2 kilometres.
• The DIT guidelines also recognise that drivers anticipating right turns or encountering frequent intersections may need to remain in the right lane for short distances.

3. Emphasising Client’s Circumstances

• Our client was an overseas student and relied on their driving privileges for employment, leaving home early in the morning to support their family both locally and overseas. A loss of licence would have caused disproportionate financial and personal hardship.
• The client held a full licence with only minor demerit points and had been training as a professional driver, demonstrating their commitment to safe and lawful driving.

4. Negotiation for Withdrawal

• We suggested that pursuing charges for such a minor and justifiable offence would not serve the public interest, particularly given the operational purpose of KLUO rules.
• We suggested that a caution would have been more appropriate than issuing an expiation notice, aligning with the principles of fairness and proportionality.

Outcome

Following our negotiation with the prosecution, both charges were correctly withdrawn, and the client avoided the loss of their licence and any financial penalties. This outcome preserved the client’s ability to work and support their family while reaffirming the importance of proportionality in enforcing traffic laws.

Police Discretion

The reader may be surprised that for a branch of law which the public may wish to consider certain, the criminal law offers significant discretion which may even frighten individuals who come across it.

It is a common misconception that a person who commits an offence should be, and indeed is, taken to court, prosecuted and punished.

However, the potential value of having a degree of discretion within the legal system permits the interests of justice to triumph over pure enforcement of a body of rules. In fact, the exercise of discretion within the legal system starts from the very first moment you make contact with the police.

A police officer may decide to issue a caution instead of an expiation notice, particularly for relatively minor offences. Regrettably, on this occasion, our client had to elect to be prosecuted before in order for the (relative lack of) seriousness to be properly considered.

Key Takeaways

• Evidence is Key – Analysing video footage and cross-referencing it with operational guidelines can uncover critical context that supports a strong defence. Your prospects of success will also only increase if you install a “dash camera” in the vehicle you are driving.
• Proportionality Matters – Whilst not guaranteed, demonstrating that the alleged offence did not frustrate the purpose of the Australian Road Rules may lead to the withdrawal of charges.
• Personal Circumstances Influence Outcomes – Highlighting the disproportionate impact of a penalty on a client’s livelihood can sway prosecutorial decisions.

Charged With Failing to Keep Left Unless Overtaking?

If you are facing traffic charges that threaten your licence or livelihood, Talon Legal can help. Our strategic, evidence-driven approach ensures your side of the story is heard. Schedule a free 30 minute consultation today to discuss your options.