CASE LAW - Dhaliwal v Kakkar

BC Courts Coat of ArmsThe case of Dhaliwal v Kakkar arises from a car vs cycle collision on 116 Street in North Delta at the onset of night. Manjit Dhaliwal and a friend were riding bicycles northbound on 116 Street between 94 and 96 Avenues. Neither bicycle was equipped with a light. Sonia Kakkar was backing out of her driveway, did not see the cyclists and collided with Ms. Dhaliwal.

Justice Schultes examined the circumstances, including the duty of a driver to back safely, to stop before the sidewalk and yield to cross traffic when exiting a driveway as well as the duty of a cyclist not to ride on the sidewalk and use a headlight at night.

He concluded that in the circumstances, both parties were there to be seen. Ms. Kakkar's vehicle due to the lights and Ms. Dhaliwal because of street lighting.

Liability for the collision was apportioned 70% to the driver and 30% to the cyclist.


Oh wow

Look, someone got 30% off for backing up. At-least they weren't turning right while young, they would've been apportioned 100% fault.

Sorry, I'm still a little salty.

30% off?

The fact is, most of these adjucations of blame are more one sided.

Such as that young fool who wasn't able to drive his haywagon off the highway without striking another vehicle (who he probably never even looked for, or noticed). 

Google Ads