Judgment: 2019-06-25 · Court archive

High Court dismisses claim over taxi collision after finding pedestrian ran against red light

The court tried liability as a preliminary issue and found the collision was caused solely by the plaintiff’s negligence. It dismissed his claim; the judgment did not determine damages.

High Court · [2019] IEHC 951

Who, what, where, when and why

Who

See the report below for the parties involved.

What

The court tried liability as a preliminary issue and found the collision was caused solely by the plaintiff’s negligence. It dismissed his claim; the judgment did not determine damages.

Where

Places mentioned in the report

  • Dublin
  • Junction of Santry Road and Richmond Road
When

Judgment:

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

The High Court has dismissed a man’s claim against a taxi driver after finding that he ran into the side of the taxi while crossing against a red pedestrian light. The court heard liability as a preliminary issue and did not determine the amount of damages.

The High Court has dismissed a man’s claim against a taxi driver after finding that he ran into the side of the taxi while crossing against a red pedestrian light. The court heard liability as a preliminary issue and did not determine the amount of damages.

The collision happened shortly before 6pm on 15 December 2016 at the junction of Santry Road and Richmond Road in Dublin. The plaintiff said he began crossing on a green pedestrian light and was struck by a taxi that had been stopped to his right. The defendant said he drove off when his traffic light turned green and that the plaintiff ran into the taxi.

The judge accepted the account of an independent witness, who said he saw the plaintiff run around a corner and onto the crossing as the traffic lights turned green for the defendant’s road. The witness had given police an account shortly after the collision that was consistent with his trial evidence.

The court also considered where the plaintiff was found after impact and the spiral fractures to his right tibia and fibula. The judge found those circumstances were better explained by the plaintiff running into the side of the taxi than by a frontal collision. The taxi had moved only a short distance from where it stopped, and the judge found its speed played little or no part in causing the injuries.

The judge found the defendant’s failure to see the plaintiff was prima facie evidence of negligence, but concluded it did not cause the accident. The court attributed the collision solely to the plaintiff’s negligence, including failing to keep a proper lookout, running onto the crossing, crossing against a red pedestrian light and failing to yield.

The ruling dismisses the plaintiff’s claim. The judgment addressed liability only; the court was not deciding the question of compensation at this stage.

Read the original court judgment

Something looks wrong?

Highlight the relevant passage or flag this article for review. Review requests do not immediately change the report.

Email a correction request

Request a review