Smith v Finch [2009] EWHC 53 (QB) (22 January 2009)

Smith v Finch [2009] EWHC 53 (QB) (22 January 2009)

The Defendant was entirely at fault for the collision due to excessive speed and riding too close to the Claimant while overtaking. The Claimant was not contributorily negligent for not wearing a helmet, as the Defendant failed to prove that an approved helmet would have prevented or reduced the injuries sustained.

Citation
[2009] EWHC 53 (QB)
Parties
Claimant/part 2 Defendant: Robert Smith; Litigation Friend: Pauline Smith; Defendant/part 2 Claimant: Michael Finch
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 January 2009
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury Claim and Part 20 Claim / Trial of Liability Only
Outcome
Judgment for the Claimant on both the claim and the Part 20 claim; no finding of contributory negligence.
Legal Topics
Negligence, Contributory Negligence, Road Traffic Accident, Cycle Helmet Use
Tort Personal Injury Negligence Contributory Negligence Road Traffic Accident Cycle Helmet Use

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Robert Smith

Claimant/part 2 Defendant

Pauline Smith

Litigation Friend

Michael Finch

Defendant/part 2 Claimant

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury Claim and Part 20 Claim / Trial of Liability Only

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Which route did the Claimant take to Samson's Road?
  2. 2 Was the Defendant travelling too fast?
  3. 3 What were the position and direction of travel of the Claimant at the moment of collision?

Ratio Decidendi

The Defendant was entirely at fault for the collision due to excessive speed and riding too close to the Claimant while overtaking. The Claimant was not contributorily negligent for not wearing a helmet, as the Defendant failed to prove that an approved helmet would have prevented or reduced the injuries sustained.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the Claimant on both the claim and the Part 20 claim; no finding of contributory negligence.

Orders

  • Leave to file Amended Defence granted; requirement for statement of truth dispensed with.
  • Damages to be assessed if not agreed.