Skip to content

Ask an Expert Filtering accident decision Legal

You are in... Forums > Ask an Expert > Legal > Filtering accident decision

Got something to say?

Got something to say?

Go to most recent reply

ACIC

Joined:

Apr 06

Posts: 367

ACIC says:

Filtering accident decision

Severe injuries sustained by biker in filtering accident - High Court decides case 100% in favour of motorcyclist - full report here

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2012/2197.html

 

All the best, Andrew Campbell, Bikelawyer Motorcycle Accident Solicitors, MCN Legal Expert www.bikelawyer.co.uk

 

Reply to this Topic  
  • Posted 3 years ago (07 August 2012 09:56)

Post a message in Legal

Fields marked with an asterisk * are required

   

Please note. You cannot submit more than 4000 characters as a message.

Upload image(s) from your computer (up to 3 images)

  1.  
  2.  
  3.  

Terms of use

Use of our community areas and forums is subject to important terms of use. By joining our community and using the features you agree to be bound by these terms. See terms of use below. 

Cancel
arryace

Joined:

Apr 10

Posts: 198

arryace says:

he may have been in the right but he was the one that was injured

so he was considered to be in the right.

he was filtering, next to the white line, passing stationary traffic, at approx 50 mph.

is it any surprise he got hit off?
the judge said even if he had been traveling at 35mph he would have got hit off.
i would say filtering at 35mph next to standing traffic is still too fast.

liability only arises after a crash, i say better not to crash in the first place.

Reply to this Topic
arryace

Joined:

Apr 10

Posts: 198

arryace says:

he may have been in the right but he was the one that was injured

so he was considered to be in the right.

he was filtering, next to the white line, passing stationary traffic, at approx 50 mph.

is it any surprise he got hit off?
the judge said even if he had been traveling at 35mph he would have got hit off.
i would say filtering at 35mph next to standing traffic is still too fast.

liability only arises after a crash, i say better not to crash in the first place.

Reply to this Topic
DIRTYCOW

Joined:

Jun 09

Posts: 66

DIRTYCOW says:

well sir

a lot of hard work from you and your team. a good result,

 

Reply to this Topic
bbstrikesagain

Joined:

Nov 08

Posts: 880

A good result in court..

..but a very bad result on the road in the first place.


I'm with you arryace.

The judgement went against the car driver because his actions was sudden, done without sufficient observation and clearly caused the crash.  It was judged that the drivers actions would still have caused a collision and serious injury even if the rider had been doing a more appropriate (according to this judge) 35mph rather than assumed 40-50mph (which the judge viewed as excessive).

Of course the car driver could have and should have looked.

On the other hand, filtering at say 20mph would have added only 1-2 minutes per mile of filtering, but would've given much more time to see and react to impatient car drivers (who let's face it are always tempted to pull off a quick U or right turn when stuck in a queue) and would have reduced the risk of serious injury should a coming together happen.

I feel for the victim and his family.  This case reminds us that filtering down the outside still has to be one of the most vulnerable things we can do.




Reply to this Topic
ACIC

Joined:

Apr 06

Posts: 367

ACIC says:

Motorcycle Filtering Accident

Hi - I think it is fair to point out that Bikelawyer Solicitors didn't deal with this case. However the result is helpful and replicates settled cases of ours in the past but that did not reach court. It is risky going to court as judges can make some odd decisions but not so odd as to be appealable!

Regards, Andrew Campbell, Bikelawyer Motorcycle Accident Solicitors. MCN Legal Expert and MCN Law Columnist. www.bikelawyer.co.uk andrew@bikelawyer.co.uk

Reply to this Topic
philehidiot

Joined:

Feb 09

Posts: 4769

philehidiot says:

35mph , 50mph

regardless - neither of these speeds are filtering speeds. They are overtaking speeds. Anyone performing filtering manoeuvres at these speeds is mental and likely to be driving without due care / dangerously.

Reply to this Topic
Valko

Joined:

May 12

Posts: 130

Valko says:

clearly good decision

although I would not see the word "filtering" in the court decision at all?

It would be good if we use clear terms here, the decision is about overtaking and nothing to do with filtering at all.

Filtering is moving between 2 lanes of slow moving or stopped queues of vehicles.

 

 

 

Reply to this Topic

Page

Compare Insurance

Save money by comparing quotes. It's quick and easy

Motorcycles for sale

 

It's only £13.99 to advertise your motorcycle on MCN

Sell your Motorcycle

Motorcycle pricing tool

New! Find used bike prices