Other "Stop" of the Supreme Court against the speed cameras to "make cash"

Nothing is fined if the sign indicating the safety camera is not repeated after the intersection. This important conclusion could result in the invalidity of many minutes

(by Giovanni D'Agata) New "Stops" of the Supreme Court against speed cameras to "make money" after other recent decisions reported by the "Rights Desk". With another order, 30664, issued today, 27 November 2018, by the sixth civil section of the Supreme Court, the principles protecting the right of defense of drivers were reaffirmed, according to which the report raised with speed cameras must be canceled or however, with equipment that measures speed and no point should be deducted from the driving license if the sign indicating the speed camera is not repeated after the road intersection. The sixth civil section has in fact accepted the appeal of a man fined for speeding. He challenged arguing the absence of vertical signs after the intersection. The speed camera (the mobile station), in his opinion, would have required the presence of other signs after the intersection.

The thesis did not breach the justice of the peace and then the court which confirmed the man's responsibility. Now the Supreme Judges have overturned the verdict. In particular, according to the Board of legitimacy, in terms of road signs, since, pursuant to art. 104 reg. exec. cds, the prohibition signs must be repeated after each intersection, the speed limitation imposed by a sign preceding the intersection is no longer valid after passing the intersection, if it is not reaffirmed by a new specific sign, in the absence of which the general prescription of speed limits relating to the type of road, except for the provisions of zonal validity signs or other specific conditions.

The importance of the decision also lies in the fact that the Supreme Court specifies that the repetition obligation is not addressed only to motorists who enter the road where the speed camera is located. In fact, the rules of the highway code do not limit their scope of application to the sole hypothesis in which the motorist enters the road from a point later than where the signal is positioned but dictate a discipline that applies whenever between the signal and the where the speed is measured there are road intersections .. In short, for Giovanni D'Agata, president of the "Rights Desk", this important conclusion could result in the invalidity of many reports.

Other "Stop" of the Supreme Court against the speed cameras to "make cash"

| NEWS ' |