What is more main: sign or marking?
Are very frequent, both on the route, and in the city, drivers face that the established road signs contradict a road marking. Most often such situation arises with a sign 3 contradiction. 20 “ Overtaking is forbidden “ and marking 1. 1. “ continuous “ and 1. 5, 1. 6 “ faltering “.
At once it is worth stipulating that the priority has only a temporary road sign , and it is specified in the last paragraph of Art. 1 of the Appendix 2 to traffic regulations. The inspector refers at registration of materials to the fact that the sign has a priority over a marking - continue dispute and consider that the temporary sign is understood as a sign on a figurative rack, and it is reflected in the penultimate paragraph of the Appendix 1 to traffic regulations. The sign fixed on a tree or primotanny by an adhesive tape to the main rack temporary does not yavltsya.
In other cases, contradictions should not be and all disputes have to be treated unambiguously: if the requirement of the established road signs contradicts a marking, then violation of requirements to the organization of traffic is available, and the citizen should not bear responsibility for it.
We will address the Law “ About traffic safety “ namely to the 22nd article: “ Requirements for safety of traffic in the course of its organization:
4. The uniform order of traffic in all territory of the Russian Federation is established by the Traffic regulations approved by the Government of the Russian Federation “.
Article 30. 2: “ The State supervision and control are carried out for ensuring compliance with the legislation of the Russian Federation and the legislation of territorial subjects of the Russian Federation, rules, standards, technical norms and other normative documents in the part relating to traffic safety “. The name of the Appendix 1 to traffic regulations gives the comprehensive answer: “ Road signs (in accordance with GOST P 52289 - 2004 and to state standard specification P 52290 - 2004) “.
Thus, only road signs, established according to requirements belong to traffic regulations, the others, actually, admit established without the bases, sufficient on that.
Thus, the sign established not in accordance with GOST contradicts both the law, and traffic regulations. Therefore, if violation of such sign takes place, then there will be no structure of an offense as as regards the 4th article 12. 15 Administrative Code, and under article 12. 16 Administrative Code. In other words, there is no objective party of an administrative offense which is based on deliberate illegal actions or inaction.
Point 1. 3 traffic regulations which is imputed, as a rule, to drivers in case of violation of the line of a marking or the requirement of a road sign oblige to know and fulfill requirements of signs and a road marking. However, traffic regulations with appendices 1 and 2 do not give a direct reference on state standard specification and the instruction on the extent of action of a road sign with the indication of plates. However is confirmed that a sign 3. 20 establish on sites of roads with poor visibility of the oncoming car, the sign area of coverage in this case is defined by the extent of a dangerous site “.
Thus if there are no plates 8. 5. 4 - 8. 5. 7 “ Action Time “ the sign is established from - for visibility restrictions. And action of a sign has to be in accordance with GOST limited to this zone. According to item 5. 4. 31 GOST, in that case or the sign “ Overtaking is forbidden “ put with the plate “ Sign " Area of coverage; or establish a sign 3. 21 “ End of a zone of prohibition of overtaking “. The sign, anyway, will work to the next intersection or until the end of the settlement if intersections are absent.
Considering a case of the beginning of the line of a faltering marking , it is possible to claim that the marking begins where the visibility restriction zone ended, that is departure on a strip of oncoming traffic is made where this departure is not forbidden. The chief DOBDD of the Ministry of Internal Affairs Victor Kiryanov noted in the Russian Newspaper (No. 4519 15. 11. 07 g) : “ According to the standard drawing the continuous line of a marking is provided only on sites with limited visibility “.
According to GOST P 52289 - 2004, item 6. 1. 1: “ The Marking of roads sets the modes, a movement order, is means of visual orientation of drivers and can be applied as independently, and in combination with other technical means of the organization of traffic “. Thus, we are once again convinced that the marking and a sign cannot contradict each other .
Proceeding from the documents regulating activity of traffic police we establish that besides control of observance of traffic regulations, the inspector, in case of identification of the fact of discrepancy of requirements of a road sign and a road marking, has to report about it in relevant authorities (if, of course, the inspector knows traffic regulations, GOST and manuals on traffic police), and also to regulate the movement on this site of the road for the purpose of prevention of formation of a big congestion of vehicles. The task of the inspector consists also in ensuring safe, uninterrupted and free journey of vehicles.
If you all - were made responsible, based on stated above, it is necessary to petition in court “ about carrying out examination for establishment of the shortcomings of the organization of traffic and failure to meet requirements of state standard specification P 52289 - 2004 " taking place;. The citizen has the right to declare such petition since the moment of drawing up the protocol concerning it - that is up to that at once by drawing up the protocol.
There are also other cases when a sign 3. 21 “ End of an area of coverage of the sign “ Overtaking is forbidden “ is established on a site when the line of a marking still continuous (1. 1.). It is unambiguously clear that at good weather the driver will see the forbidding line of a marking and, most likely, overtaking ahead of the going vehicle will not make, but how to be if weather conditions do not allow the driver to see a marking? In that case, again - being guided by normative documents, we come to a conclusion that there are no violations at commission of the specified maneuver.
Be attentive and do not break! Good luck on roads!