Contributory Negligence In Gul v McDunagh - Nicholas Dobbs, Temple Garden Chambers
24/03/22. In Gul v McDunagh,[1] the appellant, then aged 13, had been struck by a car being driven by the First Defendant. He sustained very serious injuries. The question of contributory negligence was tried as a preliminary issue. The Judge found that the appellant had been contributorily negligent and that it was just and equitable to reduce his damages by 10%. The appellant was subsequently granted permission to appeal, arguing that there should not have been any reduction for contributory negligence.
The appellant had been walking from his father’s shop to a learning centre in a Westfield Shopping Centre, a route he was familiar with. As he was crossing the road, he was hit by the front offside of the First Defendant’s vehicle. He suffered a very serious brain injury. He would only have needed to travel another 30 cm to have successfully cleared the path of the car., taking a further 0.18 seconds, and the Judge found that if he had increased his speed, he would, on the balance of probability, have avoided the impact.
There was CCTV footage which showed the...
Image ©iStockphoto.com/Clivia
![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)
