The Court of Appeal has ruled that turning a car’s ignition key, even without the driver intending to move the vehicle or being seated inside it, can amount to “driving” under the law. The decision came in the case of a defendant referred to as OFM, who was charged with causing death by dangerous driving and causing death by careless driving while under the influence of drugs.

The incident occurred when the defendant, having consumed cocaine, unlocked a car parked in a car park, opened the driver’s door, and leaned in from outside to start the engine by turning the ignition key. Although he did not intend to drive or move the car, the vehicle moved forward sharply on its own momentum. CCTV footage showed the car moving out of its parking space, crossing a driving lane about six meters wide, and colliding with a child in a stroller, resulting in the child’s death. Throughout the movement, the defendant remained outside the vehicle, with his lower limbs never entering the car.

The defendant explained during a police interview that he was unable to stop the vehicle because he could not reach the brake or handbrake controls from his position. Expert analysis confirmed that his position made operating the brakes or clutch difficult, and that the car had been left in gear with the handbrake not fully engaged. This combination, along with the absence of a clutch ignition interlock system common in more modern vehicles, caused the vehicle to move forward unexpectedly once the engine was started.

The legal question before the court was whether there was sufficient evidence for a jury to conclude that the defendant’s actions amounted to “driving” the car within the meaning of the Road Traffic Act 1988. The original trial judge had ruled that no case was made out for driving, but the Court of Appeal disagreed, stating that the matter was appropriately considered by a jury.

In delivering the judgment, Lord Justice Edis explained that “driving” requires the defendant to be “in a substantial sense controlling the movement and direction of the car,” but this does not necessarily require seated control or effective exercise of steering, clutch, or braking. Turning the ignition key to start the engine, which initiated the vehicle’s movement, could reasonably be seen as an act of driving, even if the driver did not intend for the car to move and was not physically in the driving position.

The court noted that the defendant’s choice to start the engine while standing outside the vehicle created a situation where he lacked control over its movement. Although intention to drive is relevant, it is not decisive in determining whether an act constitutes driving.

The appeal by the Crown under section 58 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 was allowed, and the case will now proceed in the Crown Court. The ruling underscores the legal interpretation that the act of starting a vehicle’s engine in a manner that causes it to move may be sufficient to satisfy the statutory definition of driving, even without traditional physical control or intent to drive.