Road Traffic Collision
In a recent case, Langleys represented the Defendant in a small claims road traffic accident. The Claimant issued proceedings against the Defendant for damage caused to his vehicle as a result of a collision between the parties’ vehicles on a roundabout.
The Claimant claimed that the Defendant’s vehicle was in the incorrect lane on a roundabout and drove into the path of the Claimant’s vehicle resulting in a collision.
The Defendant maintained that he was in the correct lane on the roundabout taking the 3rd exit when the Claimant’s vehicle, that was entering the roundabout, drove into collision with the right rear nearside of his vehicle.
The Judge held, after hearing the live evidence of the Claimant and the Defendant, submissions from Counsel and being referred to the available documentary evidence (including colour photographs of the damage to the Claimant's vehicle) that the claim had not been proven on the balance of probabilities.
Giving reasons for his decision, the District Judge stated that, although both witnesses had attempted to assist the court with their honest recollection of the incident, the Defendant's account (steadfastly adhered to in cross-examination) that the Claimant had driven into the rear nearside of the Defendant's properly proceeding vehicle, offered a more likely explanation for the exhibited damage and, therefore, the collision. The claim was dismissed accordingly and there was no order as to costs.
This claim highlights the considerations for all parties involved in roundabout collisions. Each case must be assessed on the facts but in some cases it may be appropriate to defend a claim on the basis of the strength of documentary evidence.
Cheryl Milner
Motor Unit