HomeCategoryАвтоадвокат

A report on administrative offence under Art. 124 of the Code of Administrative Offences was drawn up against the Client, namely violation of the requirements of paragraphs 2.3B, 13.1 of the Traffic Rules, which caused damage to 5 vehicles (chain accident). The Client’s car was mechanically damaged and could not be restored.

The Client’s interests were represented by lawyer Artem Fedosin.

Having heard the explanations of PERSON_1 and his defence counsel, attorney-at-law Fedosin A.V., the driver of the Mercedes Benz, licence plate No. 2 PERSON_2, having studied the materials of the case on the administrative offence, having watched the video, the court came to the following conclusion. Having examined the report on the administrative offence, the diagram of the road traffic accident, photos and video, and the expert opinion, the court found that the violation by the driver of the Hyundai car, registration No. 1, PERSON_1, of the requirements provided for in paragraphs 2.3B, 13.1 of the Traffic Rules of Ukraine was not confirmed in the court hearing.

As a result of the trial, the proceedings under Article 124 of the Code of Administrative Offences were closed due to the absence of an administrative offence.

A report on an administrative offence under Art. 130 of the Code of Administrative Offences was drawn up against the Client, namely for refusing to undergo a test for alcohol intoxication in accordance with the procedure established by law.

Lawyer Artem Fedosin proved the illegality and groundlessness of the protocol.

As a result of the trial, the proceedings under Art. 130 of the Code of Administrative Offences were closed due to the absence of an administrative offence.

The Client’s driving licence was subsequently returned to him.

A report on administrative offence under Article 124 of the Code of Administrative Offences was drawn up against the Client. The Client was represented by attorney-at-law Artem Fedosin.

The court found that the disposition of Art. 124 of the Code of Administrative Offences provides for violation of traffic rules by road users and that the objective element of this offence includes damage to vehicles, cargo, roads, streets, railway crossings, road structures or other property. However, the court was not provided with any evidence of damage to vehicles or other property as a result of her actions.

Thus, there was no administrative offence under Article 124 of the Code of Administrative Offences.

As a result of the trial, the case against the Client was closed due to the absence of an administrative offence and the driver’s licence was returned.