Correct answer
No, insufficient visibility and entering the opposing direction prevent it.
No. A broken line does not remove article 87.1.a’s prohibition where visibility is insufficient and the manoeuvre requires entering the opposing direction. Not every crest has restricted visibility. The statutory exception requires clearly delineated directions and overtaking without entering the opposing area; those conditions are not met here. Article 94’s stopping and parking prohibition also specifically concerns crests with restricted visibility and nearby areas.
Practice more B licence questions
A 3-minute quick test with exam-style questions. Free, no signup.
All options
Yes, completing the overtaking as quickly as possible is sufficient.
Yes, a broken line authorises every overtaking manoeuvre.
No, insufficient visibility and entering the opposing direction prevent it.
Editorial status: editorially approved. This status does not certify legal review. Report a correction
Keep studying
Glossary terms in this question
Related questions
- On a section where overtaking is prohibited and a U-turn is not expressly authorised, may you reverse your direction of travel?
- On a Spanish autopista, traffic fills the carriageway width and each row can move only at the speed of the vehicle ahead. May the row in the right lane progress faster than the left-lane row?
- In which case does article 54.3 waive the additional gap allowing vehicles behind to overtake you, without removing the safe following-distance requirement?
- Why is it obligatory to look ahead when intending to overtake?
- At a reduced-visibility bend on a two-way carriageway, you intend to overtake by entering the opposing-traffic area or make a U-turn without being able to verify safety. There is no express U-turn authorisation. What is prohibited?
- On a two-way road, an R-305 sign prohibits overtaking into the area reserved for opposing traffic. An ordinary lorry is still moving very slowly and overtaking it would require entering that area. Is this permitted?