Pykett v Ebony Clement & Anor

Pykett v Ebony Clement & Anor

The evidence established that Mr Pykett maintained a steady course and speed consistent with the road conditions and did not drive negligently or contribute to the accident. Any changes in speed were appropriate responses to the road, not attempts to obstruct Ms Clement. The accident was caused solely by Ms Clement's dangerous overtaking manoeuvres.

Parties
Claimant: John Robert Pykett (as Administrator of the Estate of Graeme Pykett); Defendant: Ebony Clement; Defendant: NIG Insurance PLC; First Part 20 Defendant: Aviva
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 November 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Road Traffic Accident / Contribution Claim / Judgment After Trial of Liability in Part 20 Proceedings
Outcome
Part 20 claim against the Estate of Graeme Pykett and Aviva dismissed.
Legal Topics
Negligence, Contributory Negligence, Apportionment of Liability, Road Traffic Accidents, Highway Code Compliance
Tort Law Insurance Law Negligence Contributory Negligence Apportionment of Liability Road Traffic Accidents Highway Code Compliance

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Robert Pykett (as Administrator of the Estate of Graeme Pykett)

Claimant

Ebony Clement

Defendant

NIG Insurance PLC

Defendant

Aviva

First Part 20 Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Road Traffic Accident / Contribution Claim / Judgment After Trial of Liability in Part 20 Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Mr Graeme Pykett contributed to the accident by driving negligently, specifically by speeding up or slowing down to prevent Ms Clement from overtaking and returning to her lane

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence established that Mr Pykett maintained a steady course and speed consistent with the road conditions and did not drive negligently or contribute to the accident. Any changes in speed were appropriate responses to the road, not attempts to obstruct Ms Clement. The accident was caused solely by Ms Clement's dangerous overtaking manoeuvres.

Court Disposition

Part 20 claim against the Estate of Graeme Pykett and Aviva dismissed.

Orders

  • The Part 20 claim against the Part 20 Defendants is dismissed.