Who's liable here?

holeymoley

holeymoley

Well-Known Member
Joined
18 November 2012
Messages
4,826
Visit site
Before I start I must stress this HASN'T happened, it's merely a thought while I've been bored :o

Take for example today I was out hacking with another person. We both have sensible horses and occasionally hack out through the village and so forth. Now imagine this saga- you are both trotting along the road which is a fairly quiet stretch of road branching out of the village into the other side of the countryside. Relatively built-up with houses , hotels, b&bs. Say a car came round a corner rather fast (an open corner, no bushes anything blocking the way) and the horse on the inside spooked at the speed it was coming towards him at and dropped the should and spun run causing himself to go in front of the car and rider to fall off landing in front of car.

So, who's liable? Horse & rider or motorist?

This has NOT happened and I hope it never does to anyone. Just purely a thought.
 
Depends on whether the car was breaking the speed limit. Or whether the horse was known to be likely to spook, or unsafe in traffic. If not, no-one. Why does it always have to be about liability? Accidents happen, no-one is to blame.
 
The driver would be at least partly to blame, as the highway code clearly states that cars should:

"When passing animals, drive slowly. Give them plenty of room and be ready to stop. Do not scare animals by sounding your horn, revving your engine or accelerating rapidly once you have passed them. Look out for animals being led, driven or ridden on the road and take extra care. Keep your speed down at bends and on narrow country roads. If a road is blocked by a herd of animals, stop and switch off your engine until they have left the road. Watch out for animals on unfenced roads."

If the rider has done all they can to make themselves visible and the horse is generally good in traffic then the driver may be fully responsible.
 
highway code
215
Horse riders and horse-drawn vehicles. Be particularly careful of horse riders and horse-drawn vehicles especially when overtaking. Always pass wide and slowly. Horse riders are often children, so take extra care and remember riders may ride in double file when escorting a young or inexperienced horse or rider. Look out for horse riders’ and horse drivers’ signals and heed a request to slow down or stop. Take great care and treat all horses as a potential hazard.
 
Lizzie66 said:
The driver would be at least partly to blame, as the highway code clearly states that cars should:

"When passing animals, drive slowly. Give them plenty of room and be ready to stop. Do not scare animals by sounding your horn, revving your engine or accelerating rapidly once you have passed them. Look out for animals being led, driven or ridden on the road and take extra care. Keep your speed down at bends and on narrow country roads. If a road is blocked by a herd of animals, stop and switch off your engine until they have left the road. Watch out for animals on unfenced roads."

If the rider has done all they can to make themselves visible and the horse is generally good in traffic then the driver may be fully responsible.
Click to expand...

Love the Highway Code quote, please I you agree sign my petition to make a difference, I know the BHS have an advert but this is for national viewing

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/45796
 
Unfortunately the Highway Code is only advisory - there is nothing binding about it, it is what a reasonably responsible driver would do. Most of the provisions are subjective and open to interpretation. If the driver had clearly failed to observe it (and you could prove it) it could be regarded as a contributory factor, but it is still the case that accidents are accidents.
 
It is when I hear a question like this that I always regret not being a lawyer! Whatever the answer is, the lawyers for both sides will make money!:D The insurers won't care much either, just put the premiums up by a few £s and life goes on!
 
Some of it is advisory and some of it is law - but just because its not law doesnt mean you wont be held liable if you dont follow the guidelines of the code

The Road Traffic Act 1988 says:

A failure on the part of a person to observe a provision of The Highway Code shall not of itself render that person liable to criminal proceedings of any kind but any such failure may in any proceedings (whether civil or criminal, and including proceedings for an offence under the Traffic Acts, the [1981 c. 14.] Public Passenger Vehicles Act 1981 or sections 18 to 23 of the [1985 c. 67.] Transport Act 1985) be relied upon by any party to the proceedings as tending to establish or negative any liability which is in question in those proceedings.[7]
 
JillA said:
Unfortunately the Highway Code is only advisory - there is nothing binding about it, it is what a reasonably responsible driver would do. Most of the provisions are subjective and open to interpretation. If the driver had clearly failed to observe it (and you could prove it) it could be regarded as a contributory factor, but it is still the case that accidents are accidents.
Click to expand...

Many of the points are actually legal requirements. The ones which are advisory can still be used to prove careless driving, as opposed to dangerous driving. An accident may be an accident, but an insurance company will rarely decide as that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top