Cyclist wins brain damage damages from dog-walker

[steveindenmark]

As far as I can make out it is simply a question of law. The dog owner should have controlled her dog regardless of whether the cyclist should have been there or not.
She was reported as being an investment banker so maybe not on the breadline.

But if the cyclists was also confirming with the law this would never have happened. If this was a traffic accident, people would be saying it was six of one and half a dozen of the other, as both were breaking the law. A tricky situation to make a judgement on.

 

[Cycleops]

But if the cyclists was also confirming with the law this would never have happened. If this was a traffic accident, people would be saying it was six of one and half a dozen of the other, as both were breaking the law. A tricky situation to make a judgement on.

Maybe for armchair lawyers and CC members but it seemed to present no difficulties to the judge.

 

[matticus]

Steve remember that the judge isn't deciding who has broken the law; (s)he is deciding who is most responsible for these life-changign injuries.

 

[Notafettler]

As the judge said the dog walker could have called back the dog but didn't. she was at fault.
The council said they don't enforce the law as they want to encourage cycling.
He claims he was only doing 5mph.
He was therefore cycling at speed that wasn't unreasonable.

If this was a traffic accident, people would be saying it was six of one and half a dozen of the other, a

It wasn't a traffic accident you can't equate the two as both wouldn't have been braking the law. If you want to equate them its the equivalent of car suddenly pulling accross a cyclist.
She should have attempted to call the dog back. Her defence that it was a freak accident is nothing more than ludicrous. Dog running in front of cyclist is a freak accident?