sleeping policemen...
11-10-2003, 01:46 AM
#1
Thread Starter
sleeping policemen...
...or any other people lying on rural roads deserve to feel the gentle stroke of your tyre contact patches...the question is, what was the idiot doing?
PARKER v NEIL (2003)
QBD (HH Judge Hawkesworth QC) 7/11/2003
PERSONAL INJURY - NEGLIGENCE - ROAD TRAFFIC
COLLISIONS : RURAL ROADS : OBSTACLES : PERSON LYING IN ROAD : ROAD TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS : COUNTRY ROADS : EVASIVE MANOEUVRES
The defendant had not acted unreasonably in failing to undertake an immediate evasive manoeuvre upon seeing an obstacle on a rural road that subsequently turned out to be a person.
Claim for damages for personal injury resulting from a road traffic accident. The defendant ('N') was driving his vehicle on a rural road in Essex on 2 April 1999 when he struck the claimant ('P'). At the time of the collision P was lying prostrate on the road and N ran over him. When he initially saw P on the road he assumed that he was an empty bag and did not take any evasive action other than taking his foot off the accelerator. On realising that what he saw was a person, N braked but was unable to avoid a collision. P submitted that N was negligent, as he should have anticipated that an obstacle on the road could be a person and should have taken immediate evasive action.
HELD: N was not negligent in failing to stop before he ran over P. On the evidence P was not visible to N as a person before the time at which N had applied his brakes. Further, N was driving on a rural road where it was unlikely that a person would be lying prone. In the circumstances it was not unreasonable for N not to have taken immediate evasive action upon seeing an obstacle on the road.
Judgment accordingly.
Mr Noble instructed by Hale & Abbott for P. Mr Audland instructed by Merricks for
PARKER v NEIL (2003)
QBD (HH Judge Hawkesworth QC) 7/11/2003
PERSONAL INJURY - NEGLIGENCE - ROAD TRAFFIC
COLLISIONS : RURAL ROADS : OBSTACLES : PERSON LYING IN ROAD : ROAD TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS : COUNTRY ROADS : EVASIVE MANOEUVRES
The defendant had not acted unreasonably in failing to undertake an immediate evasive manoeuvre upon seeing an obstacle on a rural road that subsequently turned out to be a person.
Claim for damages for personal injury resulting from a road traffic accident. The defendant ('N') was driving his vehicle on a rural road in Essex on 2 April 1999 when he struck the claimant ('P'). At the time of the collision P was lying prostrate on the road and N ran over him. When he initially saw P on the road he assumed that he was an empty bag and did not take any evasive action other than taking his foot off the accelerator. On realising that what he saw was a person, N braked but was unable to avoid a collision. P submitted that N was negligent, as he should have anticipated that an obstacle on the road could be a person and should have taken immediate evasive action.
HELD: N was not negligent in failing to stop before he ran over P. On the evidence P was not visible to N as a person before the time at which N had applied his brakes. Further, N was driving on a rural road where it was unlikely that a person would be lying prone. In the circumstances it was not unreasonable for N not to have taken immediate evasive action upon seeing an obstacle on the road.
Judgment accordingly.
Mr Noble instructed by Hale & Abbott for P. Mr Audland instructed by Merricks for
11-10-2003, 02:22 AM
#4
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: On a street corner
Posts: 20,574
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Craig - thanks for this. If my insurer's get funny about my claim due to frost and loads of soil on the road when I had my mishap I can use this as an example of "stuff in road I saw and prepared for as much as I could but however it still caused me grief"
Please transpose quote into legal jargon if it helps Mr T out.
Please transpose quote into legal jargon if it helps Mr T out.
11-10-2003, 02:30 AM
#6
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: On a street corner
Posts: 20,574
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cheers mate - I just thought that as da Properlawyer mere banter type english was below the heady level of legalise you favour as your day-to-day parlance.
But thanks for the countdown anyway
But thanks for the countdown anyway
11-10-2003, 02:49 AM
#7
Registered User
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 25,255
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh for the days when typing 
actually rendered a smilie flicking you the bird 
I'm sure that some of the third party smiley sites must have it, but I can't be arsed to go and search.
Back to the decision which da Paper Lawyer quoted, it's nice to know that the courts do SOMETIMES (even if not very often) reach the right decision!
actually rendered a smilie flicking you the bird I'm sure that some of the third party smiley sites must have it, but I can't be arsed to go and search.Back to the decision which da Paper Lawyer quoted, it's nice to know that the courts do SOMETIMES (even if not very often) reach the right decision!
Trending Topics
11-10-2003, 05:07 AM
#10
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Pontecarlo
Posts: 316
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IIRC a bus driver was recently found negligent under similar circumstances, when he killed some drunk baffoon lying in the road.
Think he thought it was just some road debris, and couldnt stop in time.
Think he thought it was just some road debris, and couldnt stop in time.