Case Summary
Shortly before 5 pm on a December evening in 2009, a car driven by Mr Moore hit a 13-year-old girl as she walked on a national speed limit unclassified narrow single carriageway road towards Silverstone, Northamptonshire.
Facts of the Case
Travelling at 50mph, the driver moved to his nearside to allow oncoming vehicles to pass safely, when suddenly he saw a dark figure ahead of him. He moved to his offside but hit the dark figure who transpired to be the 13-year-old. She was thrown in the air and suffered a traumatic brain injury.
Key evidence considered by the Court
Proceedings were raised against the driver. The Court heard from multiple local witnesses who recalled seeing cyclists, horse riders, and pedestrians using the road routinely even after dark. Those familiar with the road gave evidence they would drive around 30 to 40 mph to take into consideration more vulnerable road users. The driver was familiar with the route and should have known about the presence of vulnerable road users.
The Judge found that the driver had failed to adjust his speed for oncoming traffic and should have had in mind the circumstances of the road such as width, visibility, and proximity to rural buildings.
Court findings on negligence
The Judge was satisfied the driver had been negligent and dismissed the driver’s allegation that the 13-year-old was to blame for walking on the road in the dark by herself, not wearing high visibility clothing, and not waiting for her mother.
The Judge concluded that no positive action on the part of the pedestrian had caused the collision .
Driver 100% liable
Key Legal Takeaways
-
Drivers must adjust speed below the national limit where road conditions require it.
-
Familiarity with a road increases a driver’s duty to anticipate hazards.
-
Presence of vulnerable road users must be actively considered.
-
Failure to account for visibility, road width, and surroundings can amount to negligence.
-
Courts may reject contributory negligence arguments against children, especially in road traffic cases.
Our specialist road traffic solicitors can advise on liability and compensation. Contact us today for expert guidance.
Related Articles
MW v Wilkinson – Driver not liable in child pedestrian accident
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 – Driver not liable in child pedestrian case
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 | Child pedestrian toucan crossing case
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.