Stewart v Glaze

Stewart v Glaze

The defendant was not negligent as he was driving at the speed limit, was not distracted, had no reason to anticipate the claimant's sudden and inexplicable movement into the road, and reacted within the time available. The collision was all but inevitable given the circumstances, and the defendant did not fall below the standard of the reasonable driver.

Parties
Claimant: Michael James Stewart (by his Litigation Friend Christopher Ramwell); Defendant: David William Glaze
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 April 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Personal Injury (road Traffic Accident) / Judgment on Preliminary Issue of Liability
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Negligence, Standard of Care, Contributory Negligence, Road Traffic Accidents
Tort Law Personal Injury Negligence Standard of Care Contributory Negligence Road Traffic Accidents

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Michael James Stewart (by his Litigation Friend Christopher Ramwell)

Claimant

David William Glaze

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Personal Injury (road Traffic Accident) / Judgment on Preliminary Issue of Liability

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant was negligent in colliding with the claimant pedestrian
  2. 2 Whether the defendant breached the standard of the reasonable driver
  3. 3 Whether the claimant's injuries would have been avoided or lessened at a lower speed

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant was not negligent as he was driving at the speed limit, was not distracted, had no reason to anticipate the claimant's sudden and inexplicable movement into the road, and reacted within the time available. The collision was all but inevitable given the circumstances, and the defendant did not fall below the standard of the reasonable driver.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • Claim in negligence against the defendant is dismissed
  • Costs and further matters to be addressed at the handing down of the judgment