A person convicted of having left his car to an intoxicated person cannot also be convicted of contribution to drunk driving

A car owner was convicted in the Court of Appeal of having left his car to a person unfit to drive (section 17 subsection 2 of the Road Traffic Act) and of having contributed to driving under the influence of alcohol (section 31 cf. section 22 cf. section 15 of the Road Traffic Act). The owner had agreed with the driver, who had been drinking, that he would drive the owner and three others home. Then, the owner had joined them in the car as a passenger. The Supreme Court found that there was no basis for applying the two penal provisions jointly for the same offence. It was emphasised that both provisions concern contribution to the same primary offence – driving under the influence of alcohol. The purpose of the provisions is also the same. Although there is no complete "overlap" between the provisions, no increased punishability will be obtained by applying both. The Supreme Court set aside the conviction under section 31 cf. section 22 cf. section 15 of the Road Traffic Act and reduced the prison sentence set by the Court of Appeal from 30 to 28 days.

Read the whole judgment (Norwegian only)

Areas of law: Criminal law. Same offence punishable under various provisions. Sections 22 and 17 subsection 2 of the Road Traffic Act. Section 15 of the Penal Code. 

Key paragraphs: 36-38

Justices: Indreberg, Falkanger, Bergsjø, Arntzen, Bergh