MOTORCYCLE CASE LAW by Osborne Morris & Morgan Solicitors

Ever wondered how you would stand legally if you had an accident as a motorcyclist?

Below are some examples of cases decided by the courts.

Liability

Powell v Moody 1966 –filtering

In this case, the claimant was riding his motorcycle on a busy London road and approached two lines of stationary traffic, which was held up at an upcoming junction. He decided to jump the queue by filtering past on the offside, when he collided with a vehicle turning right out of a side road through the line of traffic. The defendant had edged forward before attempting to turn right. He advised the court that he was beckoned out by a signal from the driver of a milk tanker who had left the gap in the queue of traffic.

The judge stated that any road user who jumps a queue of stationary vehicles by filtering on the offside was “undertaking an operation fraught with hazard.” The judge noted that such an operation had to be carried out with great care, because it was always difficult to see “from the offside of a queue of stationary vehicles, gaps in the queue on its nearside from which traffic might emerge.”

The judge ultimately decided that both the claimant and defendant were negligent for failing to anticipate the actions of other drivers. The judge decided that the accident was 80% the fault of the claimant motorcyclist and 20% the fault of the defendant car driver.

Pell v Moseley 2003 – Overtaking

The claimant motorcyclist was travelling on a single-lane carriageway in Nottinghamshire with a 60mph speed limit. The claimant approached a stationary line of traffic and decided to overtake. From the line of traffic, the defendant intended to turn right into a field that was holding a motocross event. As she turned, a collision occurred with the claimant motorcyclist.

At first instance, the judge found in favour of the claimant. However, the defendant appealed the decision. At appeal, both parties were found equally to blame on the basis that the defendant did not indicate or notice the presence of the claimant’s motorcycle before attempting her turn. The claimant was found negligent, in that he failed to notice the defendant’s vehicle would have needed to slow down before turning right, a fact that should have been apparent, despite her failure to indicate. Further, as the claimant was aware of the motocross event, he should have considered the possibility that the

defendant would have turned into the field and should not have attempted to overtake when he did.

Mitrasinovic v Stroud 2020

This was a situation where there was a lack of objective evidence in support of liability. The only two witnesses were the two drivers. The claimant motorcyclist was on a single carriageway and was navigating a sharp left hand bend, positioned towards the centre of the road, when he collided with the defendant who was driving a car in the opposite direction.

The motorcyclist’s statement was dated 2 years after the accident and it had a lot of detail. At trial the motorcyclist described the accident as happening in “a split second”. The judge stated, on consideration of the motorcyclist’s evidence, that ‘in a case such as this where the events unfolded within a very short period of time the more actions that took place within the narrow timeframe the less likely it is that it occurred’. The Defendant’s statement was provided within 5 months of the accident. The defendant’s account was favoured and the motorcyclist lost the case.

DAMAGES

W v SC & Liverpool General Insurance Company Ltd 2022

A 35-year old male motorcyclist was driving home from work. On the approach to a junction a vehicle emerged and drove across his path causing a collision. The motorcyclist sustained complex facial fractures, a complex knee injury involving an open comminated patella fracture and a brain injury. The facial injuries resulted in permanent sensory loss in the face with areas of numbness, tingling and pain. Surgery was required for the knee injury and the Claimant was advised he would also require a future knee replacement. The brain injury left the claimant with significant problems with speech, mood, anger, and anxiety. He had a severely reduced attention span and a risk of epilepsy.

The claimant was a prop engineer in the film industry.

The claimant received £110,000 in damages for his injuries and the impact on his life and over £1million in his past and future financial losses.

MW v JT 2021

A 25 year old male motorcyclist received £110,000 for injuries to his head (including a fractured skull), a fracture to his left shoulder blade, ribs and an internal injury requiring the removal of his spleen. He also sustained some psychological injuries for a period of

19 months including depression, anxiety and an adjustment disorder. The male carpenter sustained these injuries as a result of the Defendant pulling out of a junction into his path.

If you have been injured whilst riding a motorbike and would like advice from our friendly team, please give us a call on 01525 378177 or email us on [email protected].

https://www.ommlaw.co.uk/personal-injury/motorcycle-accidents-faqs/

Article supplied by OMMlaw.