Increasingly, it seems to be the view of some people that a car is the most important bit of protective 'gear' that you can use, and if you don't use it, by walking or cycling (or heaven forbid, riding a bike with your child on board), you're dangerously irresponsible.
"It's not my fault she was injured, m'lud - she wasn't even in a car!"
I hope for all our sakes that Churchill lose, and the court of appeal seeks to set a precedent that not using PPE which is neither mandated by law or the Highway Code should not be considered as contributory negligence.
Increasingly, it seems to be the view of some people that a car is the most important bit of protective 'gear' that you can use, and if you don't use it, by walking or cycling (or heaven forbid, riding a bike with your child on board), you're dangerously irresponsible.
"It's not my fault she was injured, m'lud - she wasn't even in a car!"
I hope for all our sakes that Churchill lose, and the court of appeal seeks to set a precedent that not using PPE which is neither mandated by law or the Highway Code should not be considered as contributory negligence.