Belgrade: driver refused breathalyser after accident, fined 250,000 dinars

The Belgrade City Police Administration on Tuesday morning in Novi Beograd imposed on driver V. M. (43) from Zemun a 250,000-dinar fine and a nine-month ban on driving for refusing a breathalyser after a road accident. The incident took place at the corner of Bulevar Mihaila Pupina and Vladimira Popovica around 6 a.m., when the driver of a Volkswagen Passat hit a street-light pole after independently leaving the lane.

According to a Belgrade Police statement issued in the afternoon, V. M. was alone in the vehicle at the time of the accident and, when approached by the police patrol, refused the breathalyser. Police, on the basis of Article 187 paragraph 6 of the Road Safety Act, imposed the highest fine prescribed for refusing an alcohol test, 250,000 dinars, with an additional driving ban of nine months and a six-month seizure of the driving licence, returnable only for inspection at every subsequent traffic check.

How the law treats refusal of a breathalyser

Under the Road Safety Act, refusal to submit to an alcohol test is qualified as a serious breach of traffic rules and is punished with the same fine prescribed for driving under the influence of alcohol with over 1.2 promille in the blood. This is the internal logic of the law introduced in 2017 after several cases when drivers, aware they were drunk, systematically refused the breathalyser to avoid consequences. With that amendment, Serbian legislators equated the sanction for refusing a breathalyser with that for driving under heavy alcohol influence, a measure the Constitutional Court of Serbia ruled compatible with the principle of proportionality.

Bojan Sredojevic, head of Belgrade Traffic Police, told RTS that in the first five months of 2026, the same category of offence saw 387 drivers sanctioned, 22 percent more than in the same period a year earlier. In his assessment, the rise is the result of higher police activity during public holidays and various gatherings, but also of more frequent abuse of the rules on what counts as refusal. Sredojevic added that “drivers who refuse the test will also incur an indirect procedural penalty,” language that in practice means refusal is recorded for every subsequent contact with police.

What next for V. M., and what is the procedure?

V. M. was taken by Emergency Services to the Clinical Centre of Serbia with minor injuries, where he remained under observation on Tuesday evening. According to the Clinical Centre, V. M. during morning examinations was cooperative and mentally oriented, contrary to what police would expect from a driver refusing on grounds of severe intoxication. From the law office representing V. M., lawyer Mirko Stojkovic told reporters the client would contest the police report and seek review of the fine, on the argument that at the time of the accident he was in a state that medically justified refusal of the test.

The lawyer’s legal position rests on a recent Supreme Court ruling from March 2026, in which the court found that refusing the breathalyser on medical grounds, if the medical reason is proven in proceedings, is not a basis for sanction at the same scale as refusal for other reasons. By the court’s reasoning in that ruling, refusal due to deep distress after an accident, if proven by Clinical Centre findings, reduces the fine to 50,000 dinars and retains a three-month driving ban. After medical documentation arrives in the coming days, the court will consider a review.

The traffic accident in Novi Beograd on Tuesday interrupted public transport on GSP Line 70 for about 40 minutes, prompting the operators to issue notices of departure delays. From the City of Belgrade Secretariat for Transport, Secretary Nikola Selakovic told the same outlet that “Bulevar Mihaila Pupina, depending on traffic dynamics over the coming weeks, could be prioritised for an upgrade of the protective railing with foundation-grounded protection.”