David Robertson v Cornwall Council

David Robertson v Cornwall Council

The claimant failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that his accident was caused by a part of the kerb which amounted to a hazard or danger. The trial judge was entitled to find, based on the evidence, that the kerb was not a hazard throughout its length and that the claimant had not shown he crossed at a hazardous point. The judge's findings were not plainly wrong or unsupported by evidence, and the appeal was dismissed.

Parties
Appellant/claimant: David Robertson; Respondent/defendant: Cornwall Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 August 2024
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury Appeal / High Court Appeal From County Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Highway Authority Liability, Causation, Misfeasance, Standard of Proof, Hazard Assessment
Tort Law Personal Injury Highway Authority Liability Causation Misfeasance Standard of Proof Hazard Assessment

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 3 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Robertson

Appellant/claimant

Cornwall Council

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury Appeal / High Court Appeal From County Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the raised kerb constituted a hazard or trap for cyclists under the law
  2. 2 Whether the claimant proved on the balance of probabilities that the kerb caused his accident and injury
  3. 3 Whether the trial judge erred in law or fact in dismissing the claim for lack of causation and hazard

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that his accident was caused by a part of the kerb which amounted to a hazard or danger. The trial judge was entitled to find, based on the evidence, that the kerb was not a hazard throughout its length and that the claimant had not shown he crossed at a hazardous point. The judge's findings were not plainly wrong or unsupported by evidence, and the appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed