13 year old cyclist liable to compensate lorry driver

And can anyone seriously argue that such an outcome is unjust? Incidentally,
it is noted in the judgment that although the 13 year old was personally
liable, his employers the Co-op had kindly agreed to pay any damages on his
behalf and not seek reimbursement from the boy.

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2010/725.html

On 24th September 2005 in the early afternoon Joshua Smith, then aged 13,
was delivering newspapers to houses in Cheadle Road, Tean, a relatively
quiet single carriageway road in a lightly built-up area subject to a 30 mph
speed restriction. Joshua was employed as a paper boy by the local branch of
the Co-op and was riding a bicycle his parents had given him the previous
Christmas. [snip] At about 2.10 pm that afternoon Joshua was leaving the
driveway of No.77 intending to make his way across the road to continue his
round. Without looking, he cycled out across the road straight into the path
of a DAF flat-bed lorry driven by the appellant, Mark Hammond. Mr. Hammond
braked hard and swerved sharply, but failed to avoid a collision and Joshua
was very severely injured as a result. The incident also had a severe effect
on Mr. Hammond, who has suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder as a
result.

On Jun 28, 2:56*pm, "The Todal" wrote:
And can anyone seriously argue that such an outcome is unjust? Incidentally,
it is noted in the judgment that although the 13 year old was personally
liable, his employers the Co-op had kindly agreed to pay any damages on his
behalf and not seek reimbursement from the boy.

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2010/725.html

On 24th September 2005 in the early afternoon Joshua Smith, then aged 13,
was delivering newspapers to houses in Cheadle Road, Tean, a relatively
quiet single carriageway road in a lightly built-up area subject to a 30 mph
speed restriction. Joshua was employed as a paper boy by the local branch of
the Co-op and was riding a bicycle his parents had given him the previous
Christmas. [snip] *At about 2.10 pm that afternoon Joshua was leaving the
driveway of No.77 intending to make his way across the road to continue his
round. Without looking, he cycled out across the road straight into the path
of a DAF flat-bed lorry driven by the appellant, Mark Hammond. Mr. Hammond
braked hard and swerved sharply, but failed to avoid a collision and Joshua
was very severely injured as a result. The incident also had a severe effect
on Mr. Hammond, who has suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder as a
result.

The amount of kids who do not look when crossing the road is
staggering. Mind you they have been led to believe that if they are
involved in an accident, they would be in line for a massive payout.

I have personally seen kids just walk into the middle of the road
without looking at what taffic is on the road.

On Jun 28, 2:56*pm, "The Todal" wrote:
And can anyone seriously argue that such an outcome is unjust? Incidentally,
it is noted in the judgment that although the 13 year old was personally
liable, his employers the Co-op had kindly agreed to pay any damages on his
behalf and not seek reimbursement from the boy.

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2010/725.html

On 24th September 2005 in the early afternoon Joshua Smith, then aged 13,
was delivering newspapers to houses in Cheadle Road, Tean, a relatively
quiet single carriageway road in a lightly built-up area subject to a 30 mph
speed restriction. Joshua was employed as a paper boy by the local branch of
the Co-op and was riding a bicycle his parents had given him the previous
Christmas. [snip] *At about 2.10 pm that afternoon Joshua was leaving the
driveway of No.77 intending to make his way across the road to continue his
round. Without looking, he cycled out across the road straight into the path
of a DAF flat-bed lorry driven by the appellant, Mark Hammond. Mr. Hammond
braked hard and swerved sharply, but failed to avoid a collision and Joshua
was very severely injured as a result. The incident also had a severe effect
on Mr. Hammond, who has suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder as a
result.

It's good to see that a cyclist was found to be at fault and civil
damages were awarded to the unfortunate lorry driver who collided with
him. It's just a shame that the young lad had to get severely injured
to find out this lesson in life.

If a cyclist is negligent and causes an accident as a result, he (or
she) should be no less liable to prosecution and having to pay civil
damages than a motorist, irrespective of who receives the most serious
injuries.

Derek C

Derek C wrote:

"The Todal" wrote:

And can anyone seriously argue that such an outcome is unjust? Incidentally,
it is noted in the judgment that although the 13 year old was personally
liable, his employers the Co-op had kindly agreed to pay any damages on his
behalf and not seek reimbursement from the boy.

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2010/725.html

On 24th September 2005 in the early afternoon Joshua Smith, then aged 13,
was delivering newspapers to houses in Cheadle Road, Tean, a relatively
quiet single carriageway road in a lightly built-up area subject to a 30 mph
speed restriction. Joshua was employed as a paper boy by the local branch of
the Co-op and was riding a bicycle his parents had given him the previous
Christmas. [snip] At about 2.10 pm that afternoon Joshua was leaving the
driveway of No.77 intending to make his way across the road to continue his
round. Without looking, he cycled out across the road straight into the path
of a DAF flat-bed lorry driven by the appellant, Mark Hammond. Mr. Hammond
braked hard and swerved sharply, but failed to avoid a collision and Joshua
was very severely injured as a result. The incident also had a severe effect
on Mr. Hammond, who has suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder as a
result.

It's good to see that a cyclist was found to be at fault and civil
damages were awarded to the unfortunate lorry driver who collided with
him. It's just a shame that the young lad had to get severely injured
to find out this lesson in life.

If a cyclist is negligent and causes an accident as a result, he (or
she) should be no less liable to prosecution and having to pay civil
damages than a motorist, irrespective of who receives the most serious
injuries.

The question of the comparative severity of damage or injury has never been a
proper legal issue. Even someone killed in a collision could still be at
fault (and his insurance or estate liable to compensate others). This case
should therefore come as no surprise, except for mild surprise at the fact
that it was brought.

On 28 June, 15:03, the-sbray wrote:


I have personally seen kids just walk into the middle of the road
without looking at what taffic is on the road.

Sorry to say been there done that, at about aged 9, I walked out into
the road and was mown down by my form master, luckily without major
consequences.

On 28 June, 15:41, JNugent wrote:
Derek C wrote:
"The Todal" wrote:
And can anyone seriously argue that such an outcome is unjust? Incidentally,
it is noted in the judgment that although the 13 year old was personally
liable, his employers the Co-op had kindly agreed to pay any damages on his
behalf and not seek reimbursement from the boy.
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2010/725.html
On 24th September 2005 in the early afternoon Joshua Smith, then aged 13,
was delivering newspapers to houses in Cheadle Road, Tean, a relatively
quiet single carriageway road in a lightly built-up area subject to a 30 mph
speed restriction. Joshua was employed as a paper boy by the local branch of
the Co-op and was riding a bicycle his parents had given him the previous
Christmas. [snip] *At about 2.10 pm that afternoon Joshua was leaving the
driveway of No.77 intending to make his way across the road to continue his
round. Without looking, he cycled out across the road straight into the path
of a DAF flat-bed lorry driven by the appellant, Mark Hammond. Mr. Hammond
braked hard and swerved sharply, but failed to avoid a collision and Joshua
was very severely injured as a result. The incident also had a severe effect
on Mr. Hammond, who has suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder as a
result.
It's good to see that a cyclist was found to be at fault and civil
damages were awarded to the unfortunate lorry driver who collided with
him. It's just a shame that the young lad had to get severely injured
to find out this lesson in life.
If a cyclist is negligent and causes an accident as a result, he (or
she) should be no less liable to prosecution and having to pay civil
damages than a motorist, irrespective of who receives the most serious
injuries.

The question of the comparative severity of damage or injury has never been a
proper legal issue. Even someone killed in a collision could still be at
fault (and his insurance or estate liable to compensate others). This case
should therefore come as no surprise, except for mild surprise at the fact
that it was brought.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

it's not unique, though. There was a story a few (3,4 ?) years back
where a driver sued the parents of a child he'd run over (to my shame
I can't recall if they were killed or not) for the damage to their car
(and won). There was a **** storm at the time with words like
"heartless", and "evil" bandied about.

The Todal wrote:
And can anyone seriously argue that such an outcome is unjust? Incidentally,
it is noted in the judgment that although the 13 year old was personally
liable, his employers the Co-op had kindly agreed to pay any damages on his
behalf and not seek reimbursement from the boy.


But we are constantly told this is impossible because he didn't have
registration plates & wasn't insured!

Tony

"Tony Raven" wrote in message
...
The Todal wrote:
And can anyone seriously argue that such an outcome is unjust?
Incidentally, it is noted in the judgment that although the 13 year old
was personally liable, his employers the Co-op had kindly agreed to pay
any damages on his behalf and not seek reimbursement from the boy.


But we are constantly told this is impossible because he didn't have
registration plates & wasn't insured!

But unlike most cyclists who disregard other road/pavement users and cause
injury or damage, he wasn't able to ride off before anyone could get hold of
him!

Tony Raven wrote:

The Todal wrote:
And can anyone seriously argue that such an outcome is unjust?
Incidentally, it is noted in the judgment that although the 13
year old was personally liable, his employers the Co-op had kindly
agreed to pay any damages on his behalf and not seek reimbursement
from the boy.


But we are constantly told this is impossible because he didn't have
registration plates & wasn't insured!

Tony

As an employee of the newsagent / distrubutior he was.

--
---
zaax
Frustration casues accidents: allow faster traffic to overtake.

On Mon, 28 Jun 2010 at 07:59:45, NM wrote in
uk.legal :

On 28 June, 15:03, the-sbray wrote:


I have personally seen kids just walk into the middle of the road
without looking at what taffic is on the road.

Sorry to say been there done that, at about aged 9, I walked out into
the road and was mown down by my form master

*Accidentally*, one hopes...

, luckily without major
consequences.
--
Paul Hyett, Cheltenham