Smith v Nottinghamshire Police: CA 23 Feb 2012

The claimant had been very severely injured when hit by a police car on an emergency call. She appealed against a finding that she was 75% to blame. The defendant argued that he was not liable at all.
Held:
Ward LJ discussed the Keyse case saying: ‘a close analysis of the case demonstrates, therefore, that it was very much a fact specific decision ‘depending on all the circumstances’ where ‘normally’ the driver may assume pedestrians may not ignore him and where pedestrians can ‘usually’ be expected to follow the advice of the Highway Code. I do not disagree with a word of that but the comments should not be elevated into a statement of universal principle. Each case must be judged on its own particular facts and circumstances. The driving of PC Avann was undertaken in the emergency to attend the scene of a possible assault. Preventing that assault is laudable but not at the cost of an avoidable risk of catastrophic injury caused by negligently driving to the scene of the assault.’

Judges:

Ward, Lloyd, Kitchin LJJ

Citations:

[2012] EWCA Civ 161, [2012] RTR 294

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedKeyse v Commissioner of the Police for the Metropolis, Scutts CA 18-May-2001
The court considered liability where a police car on emergency duty hit Mr Scutts causing very serious injuries. The officer appealed against a finding of liability saying that the judge had declared irrelevant the fact he was on an emergency . .

Cited by:

CitedJackson v Murray and Another SC 18-Feb-2015
Child not entirely free of responsibility
The claimant child, left a school bus and stepped out from behind it into the path of the respondent’s car. She appealed against a finding of 70% contributory negligence.
Held: Her appeal succeeded (Majority, Lord Hodge and Lord Wilson . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Negligence, Road Traffic

Updated: 05 October 2022; Ref: scu.451474