Court of Appeal Highlights the Importance of Not Imposing an Unrealistic Duty of Care on Motorists - Peter Blake, DWF
07/12/15. Horner v Norman, Court of Appeal, 21 October 2015. In this case which recently came before the Court of Appeal. It was the claimant pedestrian’s appeal against the High Court’s dismissal of his claim arising out of a road traffic accident in January 2010. In a judgment unanimously upholding the first instance decision, the Court of Appeal provides a useful reminder of the importance of not imposing an unrealistic level of duty on motorists and demonstrates that expert evidence will not necessarily be determinative when high quality lay evidence is adduced.
Background
On 12 January 2010 the claimant pedestrian ran across a dual-carriageway road and was knocked down by a car driven by the defendant. The evidence before the High Court at first instance was that the claimant had sprinted from the nearside kerb and that it had taken him about 2 seconds to reach the point of impact. The claimant had almost managed to cross the entire two lanes, but unfortunately the front offside of the defendant’s car struck his trailing leg and the claimant was thrown on to the bonnet and against the windscreen before coming to rest in the central reservation...
Image ©iStockphoto.com/unaemlag
![Appeal judge rules that credit hire company has no costs liability following a finding of fundamental dishonesty in personal injury case: RSA v. Fastrack Solutions Limited [2023] 4 WLUK 92 - David Bowden, Erimus Chambers](/content/images/resized/images/stories/carkeys_72_72.jpg)
