Legal thoughts - hitting a pedestrian
- Nate
- Posts: 3209
- Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 8:49 pm
- Contact:
Re: Legal thoughts - hitting a pedestrian
Postby Nate » Thu Dec 10, 2009 11:44 am
He failed to respond to the letter of demand in any way shape or form!
I rang him today & he "didnt see it as an official document"... lolz...
So he'll be served when i get back from holidays & we'll do the court thing!
- blastork
- Posts: 124
- Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 12:56 pm
Re: Legal thoughts - hitting a pedestrian
Postby blastork » Thu Dec 10, 2009 2:24 pm
(edit: oh im glad the people's tribunal resolved it in your friends favour. certainly more sensible to give the pedestrian 100% blame. as for the NSW road rule in favour of the pedestrian - thats one i haven't read so i cant really say to much about it :/. i might read your attempts to recover judgment later )
i would have thought your rider is completely in the wrong.
Correct my misperceptions, but a bicycle is treated largely like a car. All cars have to give way to pedestrians. So had your bicyle been a car approaching that intersection at 15-20kmh and seeking to pass the bus, the driver of the car would have been just as liable. In fact, it is arguable that a cyclist with greater maneuvaribility and field of view should have been even more careful (and hence mor eliable than a car).
So from the prspective of a possible criminal offence, the rider of the bicycle is in breach of the law which requires him to give way to the pedestrian. The decision to prosecute/fine is up to the police.
Now for any civil liability: In the event of civil litigation between the cyclist and the pedestrian, tort law allows the cyclist to reduce his liability for the contributory negligence of the pedestrian. I believe the reduction would be substantial. However, I believe the cyclist would carry a larger blame compared to a car driver at that juncture.
- jasimon
- Posts: 1330
- Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 9:56 am
- Location: Riding
Re: Legal thoughts - hitting a pedestrian
Postby jasimon » Thu Dec 10, 2009 2:45 pm
231 Crossing a road at pedestrian lights
(1) A pedestrian approaching or at an intersection, or another place on a road, with pedestrian lights and traffic lights must comply with this rule.
Maximum penalty: 20 penalty units.
Note. Intersection, pedestrian lights and traffic lights are defined in the Dictionary.
(2) If the pedestrian lights show a red pedestrian light and the pedestrian has not already started crossing the intersection or road, the pedestrian must not start to cross until the pedestrian lights change to green.
234 Crossing a road on or near a crossing for pedestrians
(1) A pedestrian must not cross a road, or part of a road, within 20 metres of a crossing on the road, except at the crossing or another crossing, unless the pedestrian is:
(a) crossing, or helping another pedestrian to cross, an area of the road between tram tracks and the far left side of the road to get on, or after getting off, a tram or public bus, or
(b) crossing to or from a safety zone, or
(c) crossing at an intersection with traffic lights and a pedestrians may cross diagonally sign, or
(d) crossing in a shared zone, or
(e) crossing a road, or a part of a road, from which vehicles are excluded, either permanently or temporarily.
Maximum penalty: 20 penalty units.
236 Pedestrians not to cause a traffic hazard or obstruction
(1) A pedestrian must not cause a traffic hazard by moving into the path of a driver.
Maximum penalty: 20 penalty units.
(2) A pedestrian must not unreasonably obstruct the path of any driver or another pedestrian.
Maximum penalty: 20 penalty units.
- m@
- Posts: 5112
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 12:20 pm
- Location: Wurundjeri Country
- Contact:
Re: Legal thoughts - hitting a pedestrian
Postby m@ » Thu Dec 10, 2009 2:51 pm
If you expect others to read and respond to your posts it is really only polite to offer them the same courtesy.blastork wrote:(Haven't read anything except your first post)
(edit: oh im glad the people's tribunal resolved it in your friends favour. certainly more sensible to give the pedestrian 100% blame. as for the NSW road rule in favour of the pedestrian - thats one i haven't read so i cant really say to much about it :/. i might read your attempts to recover judgment later )
i would have thought your rider is completely in the wrong.
Correct my misperceptions, but a bicycle is treated largely like a car. All cars have to give way to pedestrians. So had your bicyle been a car approaching that intersection at 15-20kmh and seeking to pass the bus, the driver of the car would have been just as liable. In fact, it is arguable that a cyclist with greater maneuvaribility and field of view should have been even more careful (and hence mor eliable than a car).
So from the prspective of a possible criminal offence, the rider of the bicycle is in breach of the law which requires him to give way to the pedestrian. The decision to prosecute/fine is up to the police.
Now for any civil liability: In the event of civil litigation between the cyclist and the pedestrian, tort law allows the cyclist to reduce his liability for the contributory negligence of the pedestrian. I believe the reduction would be substantial. However, I believe the cyclist would carry a larger blame compared to a car driver at that juncture.
- blastork
- Posts: 124
- Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 12:56 pm
Re: Legal thoughts - hitting a pedestrian
Postby blastork » Thu Dec 10, 2009 2:57 pm
- jasimon
- Posts: 1330
- Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 9:56 am
- Location: Riding
Re: Legal thoughts - hitting a pedestrian
Postby jasimon » Thu Dec 10, 2009 2:59 pm
Neither here nor there to me. You stated that there is a law that says a car must give way to a pedestrian - apparently in all circumstances. I would welcome you directing me to that law so I can read it for myself.blastork wrote:ah im not dispensing legal advice. this is a casual forum, if you do not like the contributions made, there is no need to be critical. people can read what they like and as much as they like. if you have any complaints go message a mod.
- blastork
- Posts: 124
- Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 12:56 pm
Re: Legal thoughts - hitting a pedestrian
Postby blastork » Thu Dec 10, 2009 3:00 pm
you guys are really intolerably serious. lighten up. the world isn't a steel trap.
- jasimon
- Posts: 1330
- Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 9:56 am
- Location: Riding
Re: Legal thoughts - hitting a pedestrian
Postby jasimon » Thu Dec 10, 2009 3:03 pm
Then what is the point? Because that seemed to be the basis of your comment.blastork wrote:if u read my original post i made it clear that that point of law is not one i was able to offer an authoritative comment on.
you guys are really intolerably serious. lighten up. the world isn't a steel trap.
- Aushiker
- Posts: 22400
- Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2007 1:55 pm
- Location: Walyalup land
- Contact:
Re: Legal thoughts - hitting a pedestrian
Postby Aushiker » Thu Dec 10, 2009 3:05 pm
Hiblastork wrote:if u read my original post i made it clear that that point of law is not one i was able to offer an authoritative comment on.
For someone who is not able to offer an authoritative comment on the law, you seem to be definite on what the law says:
As to the lighten up comment ... I suspect that people are getting a bit over your "trolling" and reacting accordingly. Why not try actually contributing positively? You might find the responses quite rewarding; you just never now.Correct my misperceptions [sic], but a bicycle is treated largely like a car. All cars have to give way to pedestrians. So had your bicyle been a car approaching that intersection at 15-20kmh and seeking to pass the bus, the driver of the car would have been just as liable. In fact, it is arguable that a cyclist with greater maneuvaribility [sic] and field of view should have been even more careful (and hence mor eliable than a car).
So from the prspective [sic] of a possible criminal offence, the rider of the bicycle is in breach of the law which requires him to give way to the pedestrian. The decision to prosecute/fine is up to the police.
Now for any civil liability: In the event of civil litigation between the cyclist and the pedestrian, tort law allows the cyclist to reduce his liability for the contributory negligence of the pedestrian. I believe the reduction would be substantial. However, I believe the cyclist would carry a larger blame compared to a car driver at that juncture.
Regards
Andrew
Aushiker.com
- Biffidus
- Posts: 766
- Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2008 9:20 pm
- Location: RADelaide
Re: Legal thoughts - hitting a pedestrian
Postby Biffidus » Thu Dec 10, 2009 8:00 pm
Heh, it's not really a considered response then, is it?blastork wrote:i dont have the time to read everything before giving a considered response
- Nate
- Posts: 3209
- Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 8:49 pm
- Contact:
Re: Legal thoughts - hitting a pedestrian
Postby Nate » Fri Dec 11, 2009 9:18 am
I'm not having a go, but it seems you both need to understand the laws that apply to cyclists etc
I've been reading a tonne of case-law, there is 1 contentious issue - but it'll be an easy one for me to nail on the head & shouldnt give me too many issues.
The biggest winner for me is the fact he's lied profusely in his statements to the police & its pretty easy to prove it.
I rang & spoke with the pedestrian yesterday...
"did you receive my letter of demand?"
"yes"
"and you didnt respond to it at all?"
"no... i umm didnt see it as an official letter"
LOL
So i'll be pretty quiet over the next few weeks (on holidays) & will be preparing my case.
Love to see the look on his face when he sees the photos i'll take to court - showing there's a camera mounted on the bike & a few shots taken from it
- trailgumby
- Posts: 15469
- Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 5:30 pm
- Location: Northern Beaches, Sydney
- Contact:
Re: Legal thoughts - hitting a pedestrian
Postby trailgumby » Sat Dec 12, 2009 3:22 pm
- Mulger bill
- Super Mod
- Posts: 29060
- Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 2:41 pm
- Location: Sunbury Vic
Re: Legal thoughts - hitting a pedestrian
Postby Mulger bill » Sun Dec 13, 2009 5:37 pm
+lots. Can you take that camera into court as well?, love to see the reaction to the picstrailgumby wrote:Can't wait to see this arrogant piece of work get his come-uppance. Keep us posted.
Take no prisoners Nate.
Shaun
London Boy 29/12/2011
- il padrone
- Posts: 22931
- Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
- Location: Heading for home.
Re: Legal thoughts - hitting a pedestrian
Postby il padrone » Sun Dec 13, 2009 9:49 pm
No, but your view of the law seems to beblastork wrote:you guys are really intolerably serious. lighten up. the world isn't a steel trap.
Rule 236 says pedestrians do have some obligations to give way to other vehicles.blastork wrote:Correct my misperceptions, but a bicycle is treated largely like a car. All cars have to give way to pedestrians.
"An unjustified and unethical imposition on a healthy activity."
-
- Posts: 732
- Joined: Fri May 29, 2009 5:36 pm
- Location: Melbourne
Re: Legal thoughts - hitting a pedestrian
Postby TheSkyMovesSideways » Fri Apr 30, 2010 8:41 pm
- Nate
- Posts: 3209
- Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 8:49 pm
- Contact:
Re: Legal thoughts - hitting a pedestrian
Postby Nate » Sat May 01, 2010 7:39 pm
Finished going through all the case law, gotten all the forms to serve the guy...TheSkyMovesSideways wrote:Been any progress on this one, Nate?
waiting on the letter from the physio about the injury & recovery etc
Should serve him in the next week or so!
- Nate
- Posts: 3209
- Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 8:49 pm
- Contact:
Re: Legal thoughts - hitting a pedestrian
Postby Nate » Thu Oct 21, 2010 12:25 pm
today = SERVED!
So up to a 28day wait & we'll see how we go.
Also went through a heap more case law & found more gaping holes in his dodgy statements.
Game on.
-
- Posts: 732
- Joined: Fri May 29, 2009 5:36 pm
- Location: Melbourne
Re: Legal thoughts - hitting a pedestrian
Postby TheSkyMovesSideways » Thu Oct 21, 2010 12:38 pm
- Boognoss
- Super Mod
- Posts: 6879
- Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2007 11:45 am
- Location: Castle Hill, NSW
- Contact:
Re: Legal thoughts - hitting a pedestrian
Postby Boognoss » Thu Oct 21, 2010 12:41 pm
+1TheSkyMovesSideways wrote:You're a champion. Hope it works out!
- hannos
- Posts: 4109
- Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2010 11:18 am
- Location: Sydney
Re: Legal thoughts - hitting a pedestrian
Postby hannos » Thu Oct 21, 2010 12:50 pm
- jules21
- Posts: 10555
- Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 11:14 pm
- Location: deep in the pain cave
Re: Legal thoughts - hitting a pedestrian
Postby jules21 » Thu Oct 21, 2010 1:17 pm
- leighthebee
- Posts: 441
- Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2010 12:22 pm
- Nate
- Posts: 3209
- Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 8:49 pm
- Contact:
Re: Legal thoughts - hitting a pedestrian
Postby Nate » Tue Nov 09, 2010 3:12 pm
Hilarious if he does not respond & it goes to default judgment!
-
- Posts: 74
- Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 9:13 am
Re: Legal thoughts - hitting a pedestrian
Postby Zac150 » Tue Nov 09, 2010 4:54 pm
If I am correct Default Judgement will sit on his credit file as a court action (similar to default) basically this will make it very difficult to obtain finance / loans going forward until it is removed. Even if paid it will remain as a listing - part of the court process.
He is clearly not getting good advice if any, in todays credit environment defaults and court actions are taboo and in many industries they can mean your job. I am not sure of the legality of spelling out his position to him I know it is not really your role but maybe a note explaining that this won't go away and ignoring it will create a much greater issue.
-
- Posts: 392
- Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 9:29 am
- Location: Sydney
Re: Legal thoughts - hitting a pedestrian
Postby othy » Tue Nov 09, 2010 5:07 pm
He's had plenty of opportunity to sort this out. It would not be wise for Nate to make any contact outside of what he is currently performing. Let the court sort it out.Zac150 wrote:He is clearly not getting good advice if any, in todays credit environment defaults and court actions are taboo and in many industries they can mean your job. I am not sure of the legality of spelling out his position to him I know it is not really your role but maybe a note explaining that this won't go away and ignoring it will create a much greater issue.
Good Luck Nate. Perhaps he is still hoping that you're going to give up at some point?
Return to “General Cycling Discussion”
- General Australian Cycling Topics
- Info / announcements
- Buying a bike / parts
- General Cycling Discussion
- The Bike Shed
- Cycling Health
- Cycling Safety and Advocacy
- Women's Cycling
- Bike & Gear Reviews
- Cycling Trade
- Stolen Bikes
- Bicycle FAQs
- The Market Place
- Member to Member Bike and Gear Sales
- Want to Buy, Group Buy, Swap
- My Bikes or Gear Elsewhere
- Serious Biking
- Audax / Randonneuring
- Retro biking
- Commuting
- MTB
- Recumbents
- Fixed Gear/ Single Speed
- Track
- Electric Bicycles
- Cyclocross and Gravel Grinding
- Dragsters / Lowriders / Cruisers
- Children's Bikes
- Cargo Bikes and Utility Cycling
- Road Racing
- Road Biking
- Training
- Time Trial
- Triathlon
- International and National Tours and Events
- Cycle Touring
- Touring Australia
- Touring Overseas
- Touring Bikes and Equipment
- Australia
- Western Australia
- New South Wales
- Queensland
- South Australia
- Victoria
- ACT
- Tasmania
- Northern Territory
- Country & Regional
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
- All times are UTC+10:00
- Top
- Delete cookies
About the Australian Cycling Forums
The Australian Cycling Forums is a welcoming community where you can ask questions and talk about the type of bikes and cycling topics you like.
Bicycles Network Australia
Forum Information
Connect with BNA
This website uses affiliate links to retail platforms including ebay, amazon, proviz and ribble.