A breach of the regulation does not give rise to an action for damages. The distinction between misfeasance and non-feasance should no longer have significance. Atkin LJ said: ‘one who cannot be otherwise specified than as a person using the highway’ met the requirement of being a road user. The regulations required a motor car and all its fittings to be ‘in such a condition as not to cause, or be likely to cause, danger to any person on the motor car or on any highway’.
Judges:
Atkin LJ
Citations:
[1923] 2 KB 832
Statutes:
Motor Cars (Use and Construction) Order 1904
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Exel Logistics Ltd v Curran and others CA 30-Sep-2004
The claimants sought damages for personal injuries after a crash in a Land Rover maintained by the defendants. The defendants appealed findings of negligence in failing properly to inflate the rear tyres, in continuing despite the danger, and poor . .
Cited – Bermuda Cablevision Limited and others v Colica Trust Company Limited PC 6-Oct-1997
(Bermuda) An alternative remedy to winding up is available to a shareholder where oppressive conduct is alleged, though the main thrust is that the conduct is unlawful. . .
Cited – Morrison Sports Ltd and Others v Scottish Power SC 28-Jul-2010
A fire caused substantial damage to buildings. It arose from a ‘shim’ placed in a fuse box which then overheated. The parties disputed whose employee had inserted the shim. The Act under which the Regulations had been made was repealed and replaced . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Torts – Other
Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.199960