McGeer v McIntosh

McGeer v McIntosh

The defendant was negligent for failing to properly check his nearside mirrors before moving off and immediately before turning left, which would have revealed the claimant's presence. The claimant was contributorily negligent for undertaking the HGV while it was straddling two lanes and failing to heed Highway Code advice, but the major responsibility lay with the defendant due to the causative potency of the HGV.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: Collette McGeer; Litigation Friend: Amy Elizabeth Clague; Defendant/appellant: Robert McIntosh
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 February 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Negligence, Contributory Negligence, Road Traffic Accidents
Tort Personal Injury Negligence 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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Collette McGeer

Claimant/respondent

Amy Elizabeth Clague

Litigation Friend

Robert McIntosh

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant was negligent in failing to check mirrors before and during left turn
  2. 2 Whether the claimant was contributorily negligent in undertaking the HGV
  3. 3 Proper apportionment of liability between parties

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant was negligent for failing to properly check his nearside mirrors before moving off and immediately before turning left, which would have revealed the claimant's presence. The claimant was contributorily negligent for undertaking the HGV while it was straddling two lanes and failing to heed Highway Code advice, but the major responsibility lay with the defendant due to the causative potency of the HGV.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Defendant liable for negligence
  • Claimant awarded 70% of damages to be assessed