Palmer v Timms [2024] EWHC 2292 (KB) (09 September 2024)

Palmer v Timms [2024] EWHC 2292 (KB) (09 September 2024)

Mr Timms was not found to have acted deliberately or recklessly to block Mr Palmer, so the trespass claim failed. However, Mr Timms was negligent in moving his lorry to the nearside without adequately checking his mirrors or anticipating the possibility of a motorcyclist undertaking, in breach of the Highway Code and his duty of care. Mr Palmer was contributorily negligent in attempting to undertake through a narrow gap, but the greater causative potency and blameworthiness lay with Mr Timms as the driver of a large vehicle. Contributory negligence was assessed at 30%.

Citation
[2024] EWHC 2292 (KB)
Parties
Claimant: Louise Jane Palmer (Widow of Simon Fraser Palmer, Deceased); First Defendant: Mr Russell Timms; Second Defendant: Bluestone Transport Limited; Third Defendant: Zurich Insurance Plc
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 September 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Claim for Damages (fatal Accident, Personal Injury, Negligence, Trespass to the Person) / High Court Trial, Judgment
Outcome
Claim allowed in part; judgment for the claimant with a reduction for contributory negligence.
Legal Topics
Negligence, Trespass to the Person, Vicarious Liability, Contributory Negligence, Highway Code Compliance, Assessment of Damages
Tort Law Personal Injury Road Traffic Law Negligence Trespass to the Person Vicarious Liability Contributory Negligence Highway Code Compliance +1 more

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 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Louise Jane Palmer (Widow of Simon Fraser Palmer, Deceased)

Claimant

Mr Russell Timms

First Defendant

Bluestone Transport Limited

Second Defendant

Zurich Insurance Plc

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Claim for Damages (fatal Accident, Personal Injury, Negligence, Trespass to the Person) / High Court Trial, Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Mr Timms deliberately or recklessly blocked Mr Palmer (trespass to the person)
  2. 2 Whether Mr Timms was negligent in moving his lorry to the nearside without adequate observation
  3. 3 Whether Mr Palmer was contributorily negligent in undertaking through a narrow gap

Ratio Decidendi

Mr Timms was not found to have acted deliberately or recklessly to block Mr Palmer, so the trespass claim failed. However, Mr Timms was negligent in moving his lorry to the nearside without adequately checking his mirrors or anticipating the possibility of a motorcyclist undertaking, in breach of the Highway Code and his duty of care. Mr Palmer was contributorily negligent in attempting to undertake through a narrow gap, but the greater causative potency and blameworthiness lay with Mr Timms as the driver of a large vehicle. Contributory negligence was assessed at 30%.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed in part; judgment for the claimant with a reduction for contributory negligence.

Orders

  • Defendants to pay damages to the claimant, reduced by 30% for contributory negligence.
  • Costs to be assessed, subject to reduction for contributory negligence.