Green v Bannister [2003] EWCA Civ 1819 (16 December 2003)

Green v Bannister [2003] EWCA Civ 1819 (16 December 2003)

It was open to the trial judge to find that the defendant's failure to check her nearside mirror or look over her left shoulder while reversing constituted negligence, and that this negligence probably caused the claimant's injuries. The possibility of someone being in the reversing path was foreseeable, and the apportionment of 60% contributory negligence to the claimant was not unfair.

Citation
[2003] EWCA Civ 1819
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Frank Green; Defendant/appellant: Michelle Bannister
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 December 2003
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Negligence, Contributory Negligence, Road Traffic Accident, Standard of Care, Causation
Tort Law Negligence Contributory Negligence Road Traffic Accident Standard of Care Causation

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Frank Green

Claimant/respondent

Michelle Bannister

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant was negligent in failing to keep an adequate lookout while reversing
  2. 2 Whether the defendant's negligence was causative of the claimant's injuries
  3. 3 Whether the apportionment of contributory negligence was appropriate

Ratio Decidendi

It was open to the trial judge to find that the defendant's failure to check her nearside mirror or look over her left shoulder while reversing constituted negligence, and that this negligence probably caused the claimant's injuries. The possibility of someone being in the reversing path was foreseeable, and the apportionment of 60% contributory negligence to the claimant was not unfair.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Agreed minute of order supplied to the court