Landau v The Big Bus Company Ltd & Anor [2014] EWCA Civ 1102 (31 July 2014)

Landau v The Big Bus Company Ltd & Anor [2014] EWCA Civ 1102 (31 July 2014)

The claimant failed to prove that the defendant drivers were negligent; the judge's findings that the claimant was not visible as alleged and that both drivers exercised reasonable care were supported by the evidence and not open to appellate interference.

Citation
[2014] EWCA Civ 1102
Parties
Claimant/appellant: Michael Landau; First Defendant/respondent: The Big Bus Company Limited; Second Defendant/respondent: Pawel Zeital
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 July 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment on Liability in Negligence
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Negligence, Road Traffic Accident, Standard of Care, Contributory Negligence, Appellate Review
Tort Law Personal Injury Negligence Road Traffic Accident Standard of Care Contributory Negligence Appellate Review

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Michael Landau

Claimant/appellant

The Big Bus Company Limited

First Defendant/respondent

Pawel Zeital

Second Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment on Liability in Negligence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant drivers were negligent in causing injury to the claimant in a road traffic accident
  2. 2 Whether the claimant was visible to the defendant drivers at the traffic lights
  3. 3 Whether the drivers exercised reasonable care in negotiating the turn

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant failed to prove that the defendant drivers were negligent; the judge's findings that the claimant was not visible as alleged and that both drivers exercised reasonable care were supported by the evidence and not open to appellate interference.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed