header-logo header-logo

09 November 2012 / Karen O’Sullivan
Issue: 7537 / Categories: Features , LexisPSL
printer mail-detail

Motorcycle emptiness

77356472_4

Are motorcyclists adrenalin junkies or vulnerable road users? Karen O’Sullivan examines the approach of the courts

A trio of recent decisions are of interest to discern the courts’ approaches to motorcyclists and indeed drivers that come into unwanted contact with them.

Woodham

In Woodham v JM Turner (t/a Turners of Great Barton) [2011] EWHC 1588 (QB), [2011] All ER (D) 133 (Jun), the motorcyclist was overtaking queuing traffic, including a large tractor with trailer that had stopped to allow space for traffic to enter and leave a left hand junction. Miss Turner’s bus emerged from the minor road, executing a right hand turn with the tractor on her right, restricting her view. Miss Turner was held liable by the trial judge, with the 16-year-old moped rider being held only 30% responsible.

Davis LJ considered such an apportionment “surprising” and adjusted it to 50/50 even though he acknowledged that an appellant court should be slow to interfere with precise percentages decided by a judge who heard all the evidence. The motorcyclist was doing 20mph,

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll