Breath-test refusal: driving-licence withdrawal and evidentiary questions

Section 5 StVO governs testing the alcohol content of a driver’s breath. If a person does not allow the test despite a lawful request, the law does not treat that as proof that a particular reading was measured. Section 99(1)(b) StVO instead addresses the refusal of the test or of further examination steps provided by law.

This distinction matters in the file. A breath-test record showing an alcohol reading and a report alleging refusal answer different questions. The article on provisional seizure also explains what a police measure may mean before the authority issues its decision.

In an alleged refusal, do not read only the result of the traffic stop. Review the identity of the officer, the precise request, whether the instruction was understandable, the time, any repeated requests and the explanation given for recording a refusal. The records should show why the authority relies on that conclusion.

Write down your own chronology immediately after the stop: place, time, people present, words used and documents handed over. A later recollection does not replace the official minutes, but it can reveal contradictions. The article on file inspection explains why reports and attachments matter in addition to the decision.

A refusal of a breath test is a separate allegation under section 99(1)(b) StVO. It does not allow the authority to enter a specific blood- or breath-alcohol reading that was never measured. Nor can the label “breath-test refusal”, without a review of the course of events, answer every legal requirement.

The administrative fine and the driving-licence response require separate assessments. Whether the administrative allegation is established must be assessed from the report and evidence. Whether the driving entitlement is withdrawn or a measure is ordered depends on the FSG and the content of the authority proceedings.

Section 24 FSG provides the basis for withdrawal or restriction of the driving entitlement; section 26 FSG contains additional rules for particular alcohol offences. A withdrawal decision should therefore do more than use the word “refusal”: it should connect the relevant facts, provisions, period and accompanying measures in a comprehensible way.

Review the operative part, reasons, service and remedy notice together. An appeal against the decision and a defence against an administrative-penalty report are not the same step. The licence withdrawal focus area and the withdrawal decision check assist with first document review.

An alleged refusal may lead to administrative-penalty proceedings and driving-licence proceedings. Both can concern the same stop, but they have their own files, decisions and remedies. The outcome of one proceeding therefore does not automatically answer every question in the other.

Keep the report, penalty notice or penalty decision separate from the withdrawal decision. The article on separate files explains how to build one chronology without merging the proceedings.

• certificate or minutes of the traffic stop
• wording and time of the request for a breath test
• record of a test attempt or the alleged refusal
• report, penalty notice or other administrative-penalty letters
• withdrawal decision with reasons and remedy notice
• envelope, service record and deadline notes
• your own chronology with place, time and people present

Keep originals unchanged and use copies for notes. A complete file makes it easier to assess whether the request, documentation and legal consequence actually fit together.