Summary of Recent Cases – Substantive Law

Paramasivan v Wicks, [2013] All ER (D) 151 (Jan), CA

The Claimant was a 13 year old boy who was injured in a road traffic accident. The Defendant was driving through a residential area past a parade of shops. The Claimant threw something at one of his friends and immediately ran across the road into the Defendant’s path. He was hit and suffered severe head injuries. The judge at first instance found that the Defendant had been travelling at 25mph in a 30mph zone; and that the Defendant should have been travelling at 15mph once he had seen the Claimant and other teenagers gathered outside the parade of shops. The judge at first instance found the Defendant liable but reduced the award by 50% for contributory negligence.

The Court of Appeal allowed the Defendant’s appeal. The judge at first instance’s finding that the Defendant should have been travelling at 15mph was a counsel of perfection and unreasonable. There had been nothing wrong with the Defendant travelling at 25mph. However, the Defendant should still have seen the Claimant and applied his brakes. The Defendant’s only fault had been failure to keep a proper lookout. Accordingly, the proper apportionment of blame was 75% to the Claimant and 25% to the Defendant.

February 16, 2013 В· Editorial Team В· Comments Closed
Posted in: Cases