A POLICE officer discharged a firearm during an incident in Milford Haven on Saturday evening (March 28), prompting an investigation and referral to the police watchdog.

Dyfed-Powys Police were called to reports of disorder at Bunkers Hill at around 5:45pm, where an individual was believed to be in possession of a knife. Armed officers were deployed to the scene.

During the incident, at 6:32pm, a single shot was fired by an officer. Police have confirmed that the firearm was not directed at any person and that no injuries were reported.

The circumstances leading up to the discharge of the firearm have not yet been confirmed.

When Herald reporters attended Bunkers Hill after 2:00pm on Sunday (March 29), a significant police presence remained in the area. Several police vehicles were at the scene, with officers seen going in and out and carrying out checks around the rear of a large block of flats as enquiries continued.

The force has voluntarily referred itself to the Independent Office for Police Conduct, which will determine whether the matter should be investigated independently or referred back to the force.

Deputy Chief Constable Gary Phillips said: “We have initiated a prompt investigation into the circumstances that led to the firearms being discharged, and have referred the incident to the Independent Office for Police Conduct.

“We will work with them as we continue to establish the circumstances leading up to the discharge.”

A police presence remains at Bunkers Hill as enquiries continue.

A THEFT case relating to items taken from a Pembrokeshire beach has been discontinued at Llanelli Magistrates’ Court.

Gryffydd Morgan, aged 52, of Bro Arth, near Cilgerran, Pembrokeshire, had been due to stand trial in connection with alleged thefts at Tresaith Beach.

Morgan had denied two charges of theft, contrary to the Theft Act 1968.

The court previously heard that the allegations related to incidents on July 18, 2025, when it was claimed that a tent and a deck chair belonging to Clare Marshall had been stolen.

A second charge alleged that a tent belonging to Beverly Walker had also been taken on the same date.

Morgan had entered not guilty pleas to both charges at an earlier hearing.

However, when the case returned to court on Friday (Mar 27), the prosecution offered no evidence.

As a result, magistrates formally dismissed both charges.

No further details were given in court as to why the case had been discontinued.

Judge rules expired licence does not invalidate insurance where driver is not disqualified

A HAKIN man has successfully overturned his conviction for driving without insurance in a case that could have wider implications for thousands of motorists.

Seventy-six-year-old Niall Taylor, of Haven Drive, won his appeal at Swansea Crown Court on Thursday (Mar 27), after the court ruled there was no case to answer on the insurance charge.

The court found that Taylor was insured in law at the time he was stopped, despite his driving licence having expired.

This is understood to be a landmark ruling on a point of law, directly addressing a long-standing assumption used in policing and prosecutions — that a driver whose licence has expired is automatically uninsured. The judgment provides rare clarification on how standard insurance wording should be interpreted in such cases, and may influence how similar prosecutions are handled in the future.

Key issue: licence expired but not disqualified

The case centred on an incident on January 18, 2023, when Taylor was stopped by police while driving a Vauxhall Zafira in Haverfordwest.

It was accepted that his driving licence had expired in November 2022 and had not yet been renewed, and Taylor did not challenge his conviction for driving otherwise than in accordance with a licence.

However, the appeal focused solely on whether he was also uninsured.

Certificate wording decisive

The court heard that Taylor held a valid insurance policy covering the date in question.

Crucially, the certificate of motor insurance stated that cover applied where the driver:

“holds a licence to drive the vehicle or has held and is not disqualified or prohibited by law from holding or obtaining such a licence.”

The court found that Taylor met this definition, as he had previously held a licence and was not disqualified or prohibited from obtaining one.

Judge relies on leading legal text

In a detailed ruling, the judge referred to Wilkinson’s Road Traffic Offences (32nd Edition), a leading legal authority, which states that policies using this wording commonly cover drivers even where a licence has expired.

The court also considered the case of Adams v Dunne (1978), which established that an insurance policy remains valid unless and until it is formally avoided.

The judge said that, in law, such policies remain effective even if they may later be considered “voidable” rather than void.

Prosecution evidence ‘insufficient’

The Crown had relied on evidence from an insurance company investigator, who said the policy might have been cancelled had the company known about the licence issue.

However, the court found this evidence did not establish that the policy was invalid at the time.

The judge noted that:

• the insurer had confirmed a policy existed,
• no full policy document had been produced, and
• the certificate itself clearly set out the relevant terms.

He concluded that the prosecution had failed to prove that no valid insurance was in force.

Conviction quashed

Allowing the submission of no case to answer, the court ruled:

“We are satisfied that Mr Taylor did indeed have a certificate of motor insurance… which covered him to drive on the 18th of January 2023.”

The judge added that the prosecution evidence, taken at its highest, was not sufficient to justify a conviction.

Taylor’s conviction for driving without insurance was therefore quashed.

Wider implications

The ruling raises important questions about how insurance policies operate where a driving licence has expired — an issue affecting many motorists, particularly those over 70 who must renew their licences regularly.

The court’s interpretation suggests that, where a policy uses standard wording covering drivers who have previously held a licence and are not disqualified, insurance may still be valid despite administrative lapses.

Taylor’s separate conviction for driving otherwise than in accordance with a licence remains in place and was not part of the appeal.

He was asked to write to the court if he wanted to claim travelling expenses to cover the cost of transport for numerous times he has been to court regarding this matter.