29 Mar 2022
On objective analysis of the video evidence the appellant failed to exercise the standard of care required of a reasonable, competent and prudent driver when overtaking in the available time; the trial judge correctly applied legal principles, did not rely on res ipsa loquitur, and the conviction was supported beyond reasonable doubt.
27 Feb 2017
Although the magistrate initially framed the issue as whether the appellant chose the 'safest' option, on rehearing the court applied the correct legal test and concluded on the evidence that a reasonably prudent cyclist would have applied emergency braking (response time ~0.9s, stopping within ~10m at 40 km/h) and that steering right to pass closely behind the pedestrian was an unnecessary risk failing to account for foreseeable shock reactions; therefore guilt was proven beyond reasonable doubt and the conviction stands.