Smith was a 14 yo boy & could give no evidence as to the circumstances of the collisison. The only witness was found to give an account that was inherently unlikely.
Egan was a bit older at 16 & whilst he suffered brain damage, it was difficult to distinguish from a personality disorder and other defects that existed before the accident.
He was run over by a bus & unsurprisingly his other injuries however make sobering reading, Right above knee amputation, Compound fracture of left ankle, Left femoral fracture, Pelvic fractures: bilateral inferior and superior pubic rami, Left sacral ala fracture, Left scapula fracture, Left clavicle fracture, Left neck of humerus fracture, Right sternoclavicular joint dislocation, Right radius and ulnar fracture, Bilateral rib fractures, Bilateral haemopneumothorax. His economic loss was assessed at over $6m, however as he failed on the question of negligence, he recovered no damages.
Once again the critical issue was how the collission occured. It seems Egan's bike was not damaged by the collision and that somehow Egan became separated from the bike. Even Egan's own counsel accepted that he was 50% responsible for the colission. The court held that the cyclist failed to establish that the bus driver was not keeping a proper lookout and has failed to establish that the bus drver was in breach of the duty which he owed to the cyclist by not making an emergency application of the brakes on the bus.
It also seems that Egan's bike maintenance skills were sub optimal
Police COPS Report wrote:A racing bicycle, however it has a mountain bike tyre fitted to the front which is of smaller diameter than the bicycle was designed for. As such, the front brakes do not make contact with any part of the front wheel.
The rear brakes were tested and found to be functioning correctly. However, the tyre was completely bald.
How much is a front and rear camera worth ?