Saint -v- Le Feuvre [2014] JRC 142D (15 July 2014)
The Court found that Mr Le Feuvre was not negligent: he was properly turning right, had signalled, checked his mirrors, and could not reasonably have been expected to see or hear Mr Saint, who was in the van’s blind spot. The accident was caused solely by Mr Saint’s unsafe overtaking at a junction in breach of the Highway Code. Accordingly, the claim was dismissed in its entirety.
- Citation
- [2014] JRC 142D
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Mr Saint; Defendant: Mr Le Feuvre
- Jurisdiction
- Jersey
- Judgment Date
- 15 July 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Personal Injury Claim (motor Vehicle Accident) / Judgment After Trial
- Outcome
- Claim dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Negligence, Contributory Negligence, Highway Code Compliance, Damages Assessment
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Mr Saint
Plaintiff
Mr Le Feuvre
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury Claim (motor Vehicle Accident) / Judgment After Trial
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the defendant was negligent in causing the accident
- 2 Whether the plaintiff was contributorily negligent or solely at fault
- 3 Apportionment of liability for the accident
Ratio Decidendi
The Court found that Mr Le Feuvre was not negligent: he was properly turning right, had signalled, checked his mirrors, and could not reasonably have been expected to see or hear Mr Saint, who was in the van’s blind spot. The accident was caused solely by Mr Saint’s unsafe overtaking at a junction in breach of the Highway Code. Accordingly, the claim was dismissed in its entirety.
Court Disposition
Claim dismissed
Orders
- Mr Saint’s claim against Mr Le Feuvre is dismissed in its entirety.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment