Bike not a vehicle

[Ross]

I read somewhere recently about a court decision involving a motorist colliding with a cyclist and at first it seemed a clear cut incident where the motorist failed to give way and therefore their fault but apparently the bike was deemed not to be a vehicle so driver was let off. I can't recall any more detail on the article, pretty sure it was Australia, that's about all I can remember.

So, if a bike is not a vehicle does that mean a rider doesn't need to worry about complying with road rules like stopping for red lights and stop signs?

[find_bruce]

I don't know where you got that from Ross - Australian road rule 15 is pretty clear in defining a bicycle as a vehicle, although rule 17 clarifies that a person walking beside and pushing a bicycle is not a rider.

If you can find where you read it I am happy to have a closer look

[AdelaidePeter]

Yes ARR 15 is crystal clear.

It's not quite the same thing, but the first case which came up when I googled for "court rules cyclist not a vehicle" concerned the death of Richard Pollett in 2011, and maybe that's what you're remembering. The truck driver was ruled not guilty of dangerous driving causing death, because he honestly (but wrongly) believed he could safely overtake Pollett. The Crikey columnist argues that the jury effectively didn't see cyclists as valid road users.
https://blogs.crikey.com.au/theurbanist ... motorists/
https://blogs.crikey.com.au/theurbanist ... rejoinder/
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/quee ... 26ae46811b
https://www.smh.com.au/national/family- ... 2jwtl.html

[Mulger bill]

Wouldn'e be the first time a court officer has let their prejudice negatively interpret the law

[Jmuzz]

Bicycle is a "vehicle", but not a "motor vehicle".
There are a number of motor vehicle specific laws.

Unless a overpowered e-bike, which becomes an unregistered motorcycle.

[Nate]

I don't know where you got that from Ross - Australian road rule 15 is pretty clear in defining a bicycle as a vehicle, although rule 17 clarifies that a person walking beside and pushing a bicycle is not a rider.
If you can find where you read it I am happy to have a closer look

ARR's DONT apply anywhere.
You need to read the state laws, which may or may not implement the Australian Road Rules.

The vast majority are implemented directly, but there are some which are not (pedestrians must stay on the left of a path)

[find_bruce]

I don't know where you got that from Ross - Australian road rule 15 is pretty clear in defining a bicycle as a vehicle, although rule 17 clarifies that a person walking beside and pushing a bicycle is not a rider.
If you can find where you read it I am happy to have a closer look

ARR's DONT apply anywhere.
You need to read the state laws, which may or may not implement the Australian Road Rules.

The vast majority are implemented directly, but there are some which are not (pedestrians must stay on the left of a path)

Whilst this is a fair warning in most cases, rules 15 and 17 are consistent in every state & territory except WA

[Ross]

I can't find the article, it wasn't about Richard Pollett I know that.