Sally Nicol's collision locus

On 21 April 2015 at around 1030am, Sally Nicol was riding her bicycle within a group of 4 very experienced club cyclists on the A811 Gartocharn to A809 road.

The group was travelling East at a speed of around 25mph. The weather conditions were dry and visibility was good. The group of cyclists was riding in chain gang formation for safety and efficiency purposes. Sally was riding in position no 2 immediately behind the lead cyclist.

The riders noticed ahead a large articulated lorry parked up on the left hand verge with its hazard warning lights on. The lorry took up most of the left hand carriageway. The road ahead was clear apart from one oncoming car which was in the distance so it was safe for the group of cyclists to overtake the lorry.

All four did their safety checks before pulling out, however, just as they started the overtaking manoeuvre and were within a few metres of the rear of the lorry, the driver without any warning slowly moved the lorry forwards on the eastern carriageway of the A811 in the same direction as the group of cyclists.

The lead cyclist had to take immediate evasive action and braked sharply to avoid colliding with the lorry. Sally also braked sharply but she was unable to avoiding colliding with the rear of the lead rider’s bike.

Sally was thrown from her bike and landed on her back on the opposite carriageway. She sustained multiple injuries (pelvic fracture and soft tissue injuries) as a result of the collision and had to be airlifted to hospital.

Sheriff Fife concluded that Sally Nicol and her fellow cyclists were all credible and reliable witnesses. They all spoke to the safety benefits of riding in a chain gang formation and that the cause of the collision was as a result of the vehicle suddenly moving forward.

The defenders presented evidence from both the driver and a local farmer who had witnessed the incident. Both individuals alleged that the vehicle had not moved, however, their stories were inconsistent with each other.

Sheriff Fife therefore came to the conclusion that the pursuer had established liability on a balance of probability. Furthermore, he CONCLUDED that there was no contributory negligence on Sally’s part. No evidence had been put before the court to say what would have been a safe distance between cyclists and the witnesses for the pursuer were clear that there were both safety and efficiency benefits to a chain gang formation.

The full judgement can be read here.

Related Articles

Cycle Law

Liddle v Bristol City Council

Case Law Cycle Law
February 12, 2024

Cyclist fatally injured after losing control of bicycle and falling into water. 

Junction off Dundas Street in Edinburgh

Moffat v Zenith Insurance PLC

Case Law Cycle Law
February 12, 2024

Case Law: A cyclist undertakes a car on the nearside whilst passing a junction and is hit when the car suddenly turns left across his path.

Cycle Law

Davidson v Garner 1995

Case Law Cycle Law
February 12, 2024

A cyclist was knocked off his bike when he attempted to turn right by riding across the path of an oncoming vehicle without warning.

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)