TonyEnjoyD
Guru
- Location
- Newcastle upon Tyne
satans budgie said:Tony
Valid point, however, I was considering a possible argument that could be adopted in a legal environment, where a person has caused or been substantially involved in an accident involving a cyclist wearing headphones, that the cyclist was partially responsible for the incident because of sensory impairment (vicarious liability). This factor is pertinent where the injury levels to the cyclist are serious in nature and a substantial claim for damages / compensation is being considered. The big battalions of the insurance world will always wriggle and squirm to avoid paying out, why given them the ammunition to defend themselves and their client?
Good legal argument but would they set a precedent?
Again my argument would be that most - if not all - drivers their radio/stereo on usually at a loud setting.
I would respectfully ask the magistrate to test my Ipod and headphones while walking about where there's traffic before making a judgement
As to liability, it's more Contributory Negligence rather than Vicarious Liability I would say.
Anyhoos - that's what I use