Burridge v Airwork Ltd [2004] EWCA Civ 459 (19 March 2004)

Burridge v Airwork Ltd [2004] EWCA Civ 459 (19 March 2004)

On the facts, the claimant was not at fault for failing to anticipate the sudden opening of the minibus door; requiring more would set the standard of care for cyclists too high. The evidence did not establish that the claimant failed to take reasonable care for his own safety.

Citation
[2004] EWCA Civ 459
Parties
Claimant/respondent: John Burridge; Defendants/appellants: Airwork Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 March 2004
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury Appeal / Appeal From Manchester County Court on Issue of Contributory Negligence
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Contributory Negligence, Road Traffic Accidents, Standard of Care for Cyclists
Tort Law Personal Injury Contributory Negligence Road Traffic Accidents Standard of Care for Cyclists

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Burridge

Claimant/respondent

Airwork Limited

Defendants/appellants

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury Appeal / Appeal From Manchester County Court on Issue of Contributory Negligence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant, a cyclist, was contributorily negligent in a road traffic accident involving a minibus door opening into his path

Ratio Decidendi

On the facts, the claimant was not at fault for failing to anticipate the sudden opening of the minibus door; requiring more would set the standard of care for cyclists too high. The evidence did not establish that the claimant failed to take reasonable care for his own safety.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appellant to pay Respondent's costs of the appeal assessed at £24,917.25 including VAT