Adjei v King [2003] EWCA Civ 414 (19 March 2003)
The defendant was negligent in failing to take appropriate action when confronted with a pedestrian in the road, but the deceased also failed to take reasonable care for his own safety, warranting a finding of contributory negligence and apportionment of liability at 60% driver, 40% pedestrian.
- Citation
- [2003] EWCA Civ 414
- Parties
- Respondent/claimant: Victoria Adjei; Appellant/defendant: Richard King
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 19 March 2003
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal From High Court (queen's Bench Division) / Court of Appeal Judgment
- Outcome
- Appeal allowed in part; finding of contributory negligence against the deceased.
- Legal Topics
- Road Traffic Accident, Contributory Negligence, Apportionment of Liability
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Victoria Adjei
Respondent/claimant
Richard King
Appellant/defendant
Procedural Posture
Appeal From High Court (queen's Bench Division) / Court of Appeal Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Was the defendant negligent in causing the fatal accident?
- 2 Did the deceased contribute to his own injury by contributory negligence?
- 3 What is the proper apportionment of liability between driver and pedestrian?
Ratio Decidendi
The defendant was negligent in failing to take appropriate action when confronted with a pedestrian in the road, but the deceased also failed to take reasonable care for his own safety, warranting a finding of contributory negligence and apportionment of liability at 60% driver, 40% pedestrian.
Court Disposition
Appeal allowed in part; finding of contributory negligence against the deceased.
Orders
- Liability apportioned: 60% driver, 40% pedestrian.
- Costs against claimant.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment