Stotardt v Selkent Bus Co & Anor [2003] EWHC 2135 (QB) (18 July 2003)

Stotardt v Selkent Bus Co & Anor [2003] EWHC 2135 (QB) (18 July 2003)

The court found that Mr Kundi did not perform a U-turn and was driving properly. The first defendant (Selkent) failed to establish, on the balance of probabilities, that the accident was caused by a medical event amounting to an inevitable accident. The evidence supported a finding that the bus driver negligently drove onto the wrong side of the road, causing the collision and the claimant's injuries. Judgment was entered for the claimant against the first defendant. The claim and Part 20 claim against Mr Kundi failed.

Citation
[2003] EWHC 2135
Parties
Claimant: Michelle Stotardt; First Defendant: Stagecoach Selkent Ltd (formerly Selkent Bus Co); Second Defendant / Part 20 Defendant: Valdir Kundi
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 July 2003
Procedural Posture
Tort Personal Injury / Trial on Liability Only
Outcome
Judgment for the claimant against the first defendant; judgment for the second defendant in the Part 20 proceedings and against the claimant.
Legal Topics
Negligence, Inevitable Accident, Automatism, Road Traffic Accident, Burden of Proof
Tort Law Personal Injury Negligence Inevitable Accident Automatism Road Traffic Accident Burden of Proof

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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Michelle Stotardt

Claimant

Stagecoach Selkent Ltd (formerly Selkent Bus Co)

First Defendant

Valdir Kundi

Second Defendant / Part 20 Defendant

Procedural Posture

Tort Personal Injury / Trial on Liability Only

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the second defendant (Mr Kundi) performed a U-turn and caused or contributed to the accident
  2. 2 Whether the first defendant (Selkent) is liable for the injuries to the claimant or can rely on the defence of inevitable accident

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that Mr Kundi did not perform a U-turn and was driving properly. The first defendant (Selkent) failed to establish, on the balance of probabilities, that the accident was caused by a medical event amounting to an inevitable accident. The evidence supported a finding that the bus driver negligently drove onto the wrong side of the road, causing the collision and the claimant's injuries. Judgment was entered for the claimant against the first defendant. The claim and Part 20 claim against Mr Kundi failed.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the claimant against the first defendant; judgment for the second defendant in the Part 20 proceedings and against the claimant.

Orders

  • First defendant (Selkent) held liable for the claimant's injuries.
  • Claim and Part 20 claim against Mr Kundi dismissed.