McEwan was a pedestrian walking on the pavement; he was wearing a bright yellow jacket and was position roughly 2/3rd of the width of the pavement from the wall. He moved towards the edge of the pavement with the intention of crossing the road when he was struck in the face by the nearside wing mirror of a bus owned by Lothian buses.

At first instance, the Sheriff ruled in favour of Lothian Buses on the basis that the driver would not have had time to react as McEwan moved towards the edge of the pavement.

On appeal, it was established that McEwan had proved a case of negligence against Lothian Buses. He was on the pavement where, as a pedestrian, he was entitled to be. The Sheriff ruled it was reasonably foreseeable in the circumstances of this case that a pedestrian walking within about a metre of the edge of the pavement might, at any time, change direction and come to the edge of the pavement.

The duty of care was on the bus driver to take reasonable care by driving at a speed, manner and position to avoid hitting a pedestrian with part of the bus encroaching over the pavement.

The appeal was therefore allowed.

Related Articles

MW v Wilkinson

MW v Wilkinson – Driver not liable in child pedestrian accident

Case Law Pedestrian RTA Law
April 27, 2026

A tragic road traffic accident involving a 5-year-old boy resulted in serious injuries, but the court found the driver was not liable. This case highlights when drivers may – and

Atkinson v Kennedy

Atkinson v Kennedy – Driver not liable in child pedestrian case

Case Law Pedestrian RTA Law
April 27, 2026

Atkinson v Kennedy demonstrates that even in serious child pedestrian accidents, liability is not automatic. The Court held the collision was unavoidable despite the driver exceeding the speed limit.

Gadsby v Hayes

Gadsby v Hayes | Child pedestrian toucan crossing case

Case Law Pedestrian RTA Law
April 27, 2026

A High Court case examining whether a driver should reduce speed to 10 mph at a toucan crossing. Despite serious injuries to a child pedestrian, the court found no negligence.

Is it worth 5 minutes of your time?

A quick phone call allows us to ask you a few questions about what happened to you and determine whether we can help. 

This form collects your name and phone number so that we can contact you. Check out our Privacy Policy for more detail on how we store, process and protect your submitted data. If you choose not to consent, please use an alternative contact method shown on our Contact page.

Get in Touch

Name(Required)