Abstract

The commented Supreme Court judgment is of crucial importance, especially for the practice. It touches upon several issues connected with penal liability for road accidents, as well as the unnamed important procedural fact related to the defendant’s right of defence, as well as a fair trial. The defendant should be presented with a precise charge indicating the rules of caution which he allegedly violated. The charge should also indicate the form of violation of safety rules. The glossed decision raises also material issues relating primarily to the application of the SC elaborated general imputation concept which - despite criticism that it may lead to automation of bringing persons responsible for road accidents to justice - was justified in this concrete situation. Hence the glossed decision deserves full approval.