The defendant appealed from a finding that she had been driving too quickly when a child ran out between parked cars in front of her and was hit. The judge found that she must have been driving at 28mph or more.
Held: ‘I am not prepared to accept as a proposition of law that where speed is the only finding against a negligent driver, the negligence can only be held to be causative of the accident if the judge finds what a maximum safe speed would have been. ‘ The judge was ‘entitled on the evidence to find causation proved on a balance of probabilities. He was entitled to take into account the circumstances; the likelihood of children playing in the road; the narrowness of the passage available to the appellant; and, accordingly, the absence of any opportunity to take evasive action, and to conclude, first, that the speed of the appellant was excessive and, secondly, that it was causative of the accident.’
Citations:
[2005] EWCA Civ 1760
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Baker v Market Harborough Co-Operative Society Ltd CA 1953
There was a collision in the centre of a road between two vehicles driven in opposite directions. In two hearings, judges had taken different views of the facts.
Held: The court was sympathetic to the judge who had found that the cause of the . .
Cited – Wright v Freeway Haulage Limited CA 22-Apr-1999
A collision occurred between a heavy lorry and a motor car travelling in the opposite direction: ‘I am not, however, persuaded that the judge was correct to conclude that the speed of this very wide articulated lorry and its load made no causative . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Personal Injury
Updated: 15 August 2022; Ref: scu.239231