One way street-wrong direction

GM228

Just doing some research and I'm wondering is there anythibg in any of the acts to actually state that driving the wrong way down a one way street or the wrong way in a traffic lane is actually illegal OTHER than failing to obey a sign as I'm finding it hard to find any specifics on it.

In other words is there anything that states or implies that you shouldn't drive against the normal flow of traffic or you can't drive the wrong way in a lane etc or something to that effect (again not including traffic signs and their normal meaning).

GM228

Marcusm

GM228 wrote: »

Just doing some research and I'm wondering is there anythibg in any of the acts to actually state that driving the wrong way down a one way street or the wrong way in a traffic lane is actually illegal OTHER than failing to obey a sign as I'm finding it hard to find any specifics on it.

In other words is there anything that states or implies that you shouldn't drive against the normal flow of traffic or you can't drive the wrong way in a lane etc or something to that effect (again not including traffic signs and their normal meaning).

GM228

Almost certainly a contravention of para 23 S.I. No. 182/1997: ROAD TRAFFIC (TRAFFIC AND PARKING) REGULATIONS, 1997

But also possible to prosecute as driving without due care and attention.

GM228

Marcusm wrote: »

Almost certainly a contravention of para 23 S.I. No. 182/1997: ROAD TRAFFIC (TRAFFIC AND PARKING) REGULATIONS, 1997

But also possible to prosecute as driving without due care and attention.

Indeed, but signs out of the equation I'm wondering is there actually anthing specific about driving the wrong way or against the normal flow of a lane?

Not an easy one to find and I suspect there isn't anything actually like that as the law seems to solely rely on the signs/road markings?

GM228

Victor

It is only a one-way street by virtue of the signs (which includes the road markings). There will also be managerial order somewhere that backs up the signs.

However, the mere absence of the signs might not be enough to give a knowledgeable person carte blanche to go the wrong way - driving without due care and attention could be bumped up to dangerous driving.

However, note that there are two roads in Cork where you drive on the right and that there are about 20 locations in Dublin where there are no entry signs on two-way streets that have 'except cyclists' exemptions.

Peregrinus

GM228 wrote: »

Indeed, but signs out of the equation I'm wondering is there actually anthing specific about driving the wrong way or against the normal flow of a lane?

No. But why would there need to be?

The behaviour can be prosecuted as contravening a sign, and it can be prosecuted as driving without due care and attention (or a more serious offence, e.g reckless driving). So why would there be a need to create a specific offence dealing only with this behaviour? The range of negligent, reckless or dangerous behaviours that drivers can engage in is almost infinite; they don't all need a distinct offence.

Valetta

I know of a short one way road (about 200 metres). half way along in an entrance to a college.

I regularly see cars coming out from the college and going the "wrong" way, which would be more convenient for them.

I have checked, and if you didn't already know that the road was one way, there are no markings or signs to indicate that it is so.

Obviously everyone that drives into the college knows that the road is one way, but I wonder could they be done coming out and going against the direction?

Victor

Tallaght IT? Knowingly doing something like this is stupid, selfish, disruptive and potentially dangerous. Judges are likely to take a dimmer view of it compared to someone doing it innocently.

There is no obligation for intermediate signage for accesses to the public road, although it might be a good idea in the case of something like a college.

That said, are there road markings? https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.2894378,-6.3661752,3a,75y,90.4h,89.87t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sz8CHRAiJjSCJ38yH1emVTQ!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3Dz8CHRAiJjSCJ38yH1emVTQ%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D265.56421%26pitch%3D0!7i13312!8i6656

Valetta

it's actually Luby Road in Inchicore.

Just noticed now there is an arrow in the middle of the road just outside the entrance, so there should be no excuse for going the wrong way.

https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.3396581,-6.312421,3a,75y,60.38h,70.59t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1spevQT01XZwfv7K7ZEBdKBw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Victor

Valetta wrote: »

it's actually Luby Road in Inchicore.

Just noticed now there is an arrow in the middle of the road just outside the entrance, so there should be no excuse for going the wrong way.

https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.3396581,-6.312421,3a,75y,60.38h,70.59t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1spevQT01XZwfv7K7ZEBdKBw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.3398834,-6.3119147,3a,37.5y,227.2h,94.07t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sRhjU9YBMXlnCRaaXbRSYLw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DRhjU9YBMXlnCRaaXbRSYLw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D282.63065%26pitch%3D0!7i13312!8i6656

OK, that looks like incomplete signage. The only thing indicating that it is one-way is the single arrow outside the college gate. By itself, the no entry signage at the bottom of the hill is a separate matter - there are some streets that are two-way for residents only.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

GM228

Thanks for the replies everyone, it's more out of curiosity than anything else!

Final question, is the DTTAS Traffic Signs manual legally binding under the following?

The manual states: -

"A direction given by the Minister for Transport to road authorities under section 95(16) of the Road Traffic Act 1961 in relation to the provision of traffic signs."


In relation to the above RTA 1961 Section 95 (16) states:-

"Where a traffic sign, not being a traffic sign to which regulations under subsection (2) of this section relate, is provided under this section by a road authority, it shall be in conformity with any general or particular directions that may be given from time to time by the Minister."

Does that in effect make the manual legally binding, as in roads must be signed/lined as per the manual?

Separately how does Irish law define "direction"?

GM228

Victor

Other signs can be used for novel situations (probably not for matters covered by the Traffic Signs Manual), although I think the minister can forbid certain signs.

GM228

Victor wrote: »

Other signs can be used for novel situations (probably not for matters covered by the Traffic Signs Manual), although I think the minister can forbid certain signs.

But is the manual mandatory, in other words is what's in it a legal requirement or a legal guide?

Is a ministers "direction" mandatory or optional?

I'm sure "direction" must be defined in some local government or ministerial act but can't find it?

GM228

Victor

Where a traffic sign, not being a traffic sign to which regulations under subsection (2) of this section relate, is provided under this section by a road authority, it shall be in conformity with any general or particular directions that may be given from time to time by the Minister.

Year 1, day 1 of any law course. "Shall" means there is no choice, it must be done.

GM228

Victor wrote: »

Year 1, day 1 of any law course. "Shall" means there is no choice, it must be done.

That is true and I was also told that, but is that still the case today I wonder, hence my question!

In the US the Supreme Court ruled that shall can actually imply may, will or must and because it isn't clearly defined that only the word "must" now means mandatory and so shall is not taught that way anymore in law school (in the US anyway).

GM228

Peregrinus

Legislative drafters nowadays prefer "must", or similar language ("The Minister is to do such-and-such"). But there are plenty of long-standing laws which still have "shall", and that creates an obligation.

But . . .

If a roads authority erects a sign which is not in conformity with directions given by the Minister, the authority is in breach of the obligations imposed on it. There may or may not be a sanction imposed on the authority; at the very least there is a continuing obligation imposed on the authority to rectify the sign. But it doesn't follow that the sign is a legal nullity, and that road users can ignore it with impunity.