-
but why if they are both responsible (which from what they say in the articles is crap anyway) is the cyclist the one having to pay compensation? surely natural justice is a slap on the wrists for both of them.
Maybe the Ped just had a cracking lawyer.
Manson7am-
I'm not a judge m8 but the article says the verdict was that ultimately the cyclist should have been able to anticipate and avoid, and given we know he saw her and had time to sound an air horn that seems fair enough. Also, swerving behind a ped is just asking for them to dodge backwards into you imhop, especially if you're sounding a massive airhorn at them. Both come across as fucking liabilities though...
I don't think she'll get much as she was partly liable and injuries minor, probably the lawyers fees will be the kick in the spiritual shitter...
-
Tbh without reading the judgment it's all a bit meaningless. The media is hopelessly shambolic when it comes to reporting on anything legally related.
deleted
hugo7
Don't civil claims have a lower standard of evidence for culpability tho?
Ianl but thought civil cases more geared to natural justice and financial settlements.