Liability was denied by the Defendant but we proved he had time and opportunity to slow vehicle down. Siân, aged 35, was travelling across a dual carriageway road either riding or walking with her bicycle when she was hit by a car.
As a result of the collision, she sustained catastrophic injuries including a severe traumatic brain injury, fractures of the thoracic and cervical spine, bilateral clavicle fractures, bruising of the liver and various lacerations and abrasions.
Siân has a significant ongoing disabilities; she suffers from poor memory, has problems planning activities, has experienced personality change and suffers from anxiety and increased agitation.
Her concentration is reduced and she suffers from headaches, has poor balance and requires considerable support.
The driver of the car (Defendant) denied liability for Siân’s accident and appeared to be supported by the evidence of witnesses to the incident who said that Siân had entered the road giving the Defendant no chance to avoid a collision.
However, we were able to obtain expert evidence from an accident reconstruction expert who advised that, had the Defendant been keeping a reasonable lookout and reacted as soon as Siân began to cross the road, the Defendant could have safely brought his vehicle to a stop in time to avoid a collision.
We issued Court proceedings and, ultimately, the Defendant made an offer to settle liability with less than a month to go before the trial which we accepted.
Siân’s claim will now continue to establish what compensation she will require to enable her to have the support, care and treatment which she needs as a result of the life changing injuries she sustained in this collision.
Amber Mitchell, personal injury solicitor at Hugh James, acted on Siân’s behalf and commented:
Siân’s case was particularly difficult as on the face of it. This appeared to be a scenario where the Defendant had no chance to react and avoid my client when she stepped into his path.The evidence of the independent witnesses was conflicting as to whether Siân was riding or cycling her bicycle and the Defendant was also alleging that, even if the accident could have been avoided, she contributed to her injuries by failing to wear a cycle helmet.
The evidence of the accident reconstruction expert was crucial in this case to establish that, contrary to appearances, the Defendant could and should have applied his brakes sooner, and in helping us to negotiate a liability settlement.
The names and identifying details of the client have been changed to protect the privacy of individuals involved.
