Gazukes wrote:You do seem keen to argue the issue. I am not a lawyer. But when I was studying the principles of Duty of Care, they do not only pertain to professional instances. Citizens all have a duty of care to those around them, and I think the term that is used is 'how a reasonable person would act in accordance with their experience and knowledge '. If you find a person in the street who is injured or maimed, and you did nothing to assist that person, then you have failed in your duty of care, and may be liable for prosecution. Phoning the ambulance would be enough for the general population to have acted rightly.
Duty of care in a practical sense doesn't get someone convicted of driving offences.
As far as civil liability goes (where for the most part duty of care might matter), for a driver that is outsourced to their CTP insurer, who will ultimately add that case to next years claim to increase CTP minimum price and foist it onto the drivers that do actually show some care and don't have collisions.
ie neither duty of care, nor CTP conspire to do more than mitigate some of the worst post accident injustices, its certainly not a principle that applies to accident reduction via traffic infringements to improve behavior or whatnot.