The Provincial Court of Cáceres has issued a ruling ruling that electric scooters that exceed the 25 kilometers / hour of speed or 1000 watts of power are mopeds and for its use you need a driving license.
The Chamber thus dismisses the appeal that the defendant filed against the judgment of the Criminal Court number 2 of Cáceres, which was intended to declare that being an electric scooter did not need a driving license.
The defendant was denounced by agent of the Local police for driving with an electric scooter without a driving license and the Criminal Court declared that it was necessary for that vehicle and that driving without it is a crime against traffic safety.
However, the court acquitted the accused due to a type error when considering that official sources had informed him that in his case it was not necessary, the Superior Court of Justice of Extremadura (TSJEx) notes in a press release.
Despite absolve him, the involved resorted asking to declare that what he was driving was not a moped but an electric scooter and “he has no obligation to obtain a driver’s license.”
Instead, the Hearing of Cáceres in its second legal basis indicates that the Royal Legislative Decree 6/2015, of October 30, which approves the consolidated text of the Law on Traffic, Traffic, Motor Vehicles and Road Safety, considers “moped to a two-wheeled vehicle, with a maximum speed of 45 km / h or well a maximum nominal continuous power less than or equal to 4 kw if it is an electric motor, these being “the characteristics of the vehicle driving the defendant”.
The appeal, therefore, has been dismissed and the sentence is final.
It should be remembered that the facts in question date back to September 17, 2019, when the accused, of legal age and without a criminal record, was driving in Casar de Cáceres the vehicle you own without a moped license plate.
The driven vehicle, an electric scooter, “It is considered a moped and requires the possession of a permit or license for its driving, “but its owner did not know that said vehicle required a driver’s license for its use,” having been misled as it was not properly informed of its need to drive, “collects the judgment.