Bruma (A Protected Party) v Hassan [2017]

At around 6am in November 2012, the pedestrian was crossing the road on foot.

There was a pelican crossing further down the road but she had elected not to use it.

As she reached the centre of the four-lane road, she was struck by the defender's vehicle, which was believed to be travelling at a speed of between 20 and 30mph.

The Judge viewed that primary liability for the collision lay with the driver.

The maximum speed at which he should have been travelling – given the dark and wet road conditions – was 20mph.

If he had been driving at a significantly lower speed and been keeping a more alert lookout, the collision could likely have been avoided.

However, the Judge also made a finding of 20% contributory negligence against the pedestrian as she should have seen the defender’s vehicle approaching, and had also put herself needlessly at risk by not making use of the pedestrian crossing.

The full decision can be viewed here.