An Irish cyclist has been awarded €20,000 after a judge ruled he was 60 per cent responsible for the collision that resulted in a motorist driving over his foot. Bike shop director Pat Deegan had gone through a pelican crossing on red before being hit by Jennifer McPartlin as she turned onto the road.
The Irish Times reports that Deegan was riding to his business in Sandymount, Dublin on May 18, 2015, along Eglington Road, Donnybrook, when he was hit by McPartlin who had pulled out of Brookvale Road.
McPartlin’s car then rolled over Deegan’s foot causing a fracture to his left tibia and fibula, which required surgery.
Deegan sued McPartlin over the incident with the parties agreeing the level of damages should be €51,600.
Deegan said McPartlin pulled out of Brookvale Road onto Eglinton Road without warning, hitting him as he waited at the edge of a yellow box for traffic to move on.
McPartlin said she slowly emerged from the junction to give herself a better view of oncoming traffic and that another driver had signalled for her to pull out.
She said Deegan had gone through the pelican crossing on red, which he denied.
Another cyclist told Ireland’s High Court that the lights at the pelican crossing were red and that she had stopped to allow McPartlin to pull out.
Justice David Keane concluded that McPartlin had assumed that if the lights were red, there wouldn’t be any traffic coming from that direction and hadn’t looked.
He said while this was understandable, it was incorrect and the assumption, “could not operate as an alternative for the strict requirement upon a motorist at a yield sign to keep a proper lookout for traffic, including bicycles, on the main road.”
Preferring the evidence of the second cyclist who he said was “a disinterested witness,” Keane found that on the balance of probabilities, Deegan had gone through a red light and continued on to the Brookvale Road junction.
Deegan was awarded €20,640 with costs to be decided later.
Add new comment
5 comments
Change cyclist for another car that went through the lights. As defensive now?
The % blame is wrong, judged upon by a motorist who equally has no idea. The driver would have crashed into anyone whether the light was red or otherwise, that's the whole point of putting the onus onto those that present the greatest harm.
Time and again we read about scenarios when a cyclist gets slammed by joe public and police when there's a collision not of their fault, the usual what should/could they have done to avoid the collision, judges saying they/we need to be more aware of x despite the fact the brain can only process information so quickly and % of fault put greater on the cyclist. Time triallist that was hit a few years ago on a dual cariageway (by a van/transporter?) and they were primarily blamed, the rider who was struck on a narrow country lane by a SUV pulling a trailer at high speed and again the onus of safety pushed onto the cyclist for the incident.
We get told to slow down to essentially walking speed so as to react to motons and peds actions, thus nullfies the point of riding a bike on the road, it's ALWAYS more onus is pressed upon cyclists to not hit and not get hit than any other road user group such that the system and those sitting in judgement are clearly bias.
This is just another one of those cases were if it was the other way around with a pedestrian and the cyclist simply pulling out the cyclist would have been front page media fodder!
If you can't process that you need to stop for a red light, then best to stick to the bus.
The result is two road users with poor standards of observation or disregard for rules ended up coming together. Nobody is winning as our insurance payments will have to pay for it.
The driver couldn't be arsed to look and cyclist couldn't be arsed to stop.
I can see that result annoying some motons.