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

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

Defendant was solely responsible for the collision due to excessive speed and riding too close to Claimant while overtaking. No contributory negligence found against Claimant for not wearing a cycle helmet, as Defendant failed to prove that helmet would have prevented or reduced injuries sustained.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2009] EWHC 53
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 Claimant on both claim and Part 20 claim. No finding of contributory negligence.
Legal Topics
Road Traffic Accident, Contributory Negligence, Cycle Helmet Use, Damages Assessment
Tort Personal Injury Road Traffic Accident Contributory Negligence Cycle Helmet Use Damages Assessment

Source-derived case record

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

Defendant was solely responsible for the collision due to excessive speed and riding too close to Claimant while overtaking. No contributory negligence found against Claimant for not wearing a cycle helmet, as Defendant failed to prove that helmet would have prevented or reduced injuries sustained.

Court Disposition

Judgment for Claimant on both claim and Part 20 claim. No finding of contributory negligence.

Orders

  • Leave granted to file Amended Defence dispensing with statement of truth.
  • Damages to be assessed if not agreed.