Saint -v- Le Feuvre [2014] JRC 142D (15 July 2014)

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.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Saint

Plaintiff

Mr Le Feuvre

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury Claim (motor Vehicle Accident) / Judgment After Trial

  1. 1 Whether the defendant was negligent in causing the accident
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff was contributorily negligent or solely at fault
  3. 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.