mjr wrote: ... While I saw a lot of attempts at various proofs and disproofs by assertion, I didn't spot anyone citing case law or legislation of what "propelling" is or isn't. Does anyone know any?
Let's look again at snigbo's assertion.
snibgo wrote:The 1954 Highway Code includes, in the legal bit at the back:
You must, even if you are wheeling your bike, observe traffic signs and signals and the directions of a police officer directing traffic. R.T.A. 1930 Sect. 49
(My emphasis.)
So that sent me scurrying to the
RTA 1930. Section 49 is:
Where a police constable is for the time being engaged in the regulation of traffic in a road, or where any traffic sign being a sign for regulating the movement of traffic or indicating the route to be followed by traffic, has been lawfully placed on or near any road in accordance with the provisions of the last preceding section, any person driving or propelling any vehicle who--
(a) neglects or refuses to stop the vehicle or to proceed in or keep to a particular line of traffic when directed so to do by the police constable in the execution of his duty; or
(b) fails to conform to the indication given by the sign, shall be guilty of an offence.
(My emphasis.)
From this I deduce that, back in those olden days, a person wheeling a bike was regarded as a person propelling a vehicle, but not driving it.
This remains for the Highway Code 1978, as revised 1983.
You must, even if you are wheeling your cycle,
- observe amber and "STOP" signals, traffic signs which give orders, double white lines (solid or broken), yellow road markings and the directions of a police constabe controling traffic;
Relevant referenced acts is Road Traffic Act 1972 Section 22, still propelling or driving.
22 Drivers to comply with traffic directions
(1)Where a constable is for the time being engaged in the regulation of traffic in a road, or where a traffic sign, being a sign of the prescribed size, colour and type, or of another character authorised by the Secretary of State under the provisions in that behalf of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1967, has been lawfully placed on or near a road, a person driving or propelling a vehicle who—
(a)neglects or refuses to stop the vehicle or to make it proceed in, or keep to, a particular line of traffic when directed so to do by the constable in the execution of his duty, or
(b)fails to comply with the indication given by the sign,
shall be guilty of an offence.
The current legislation is similarly worded. I neither know when nor why the HC dropped the "even if wheeling phrase".
Road Traffic Act 1988, s36.
36 Drivers to comply with traffic signs.
(1)Where a traffic sign, being a sign—
(a)of the prescribed size, colour and type, or
(b)of another character authorised by the [relevant authority] under the provisions in that behalf of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984,
has been lawfully placed on or near a road, a person driving or propelling a vehicle who fails to comply with the indication given by the sign is guilty of an offence.
The HC 1954 and 1983 both make it clear that wheeling a cycle through a red light is an offence. For it to be an offence the act of "wheeling" a cycle must fall within either "driving", "propelling" or both.