Konho Kim was driving his car on 108 Avenue approaching the 4 way stop at the intersection of 164 Street in Surrey. He stopped and observed a car driven by Megan Levonne approching from his left. Expecting Ms. Levonne to stop, Mr. Kim proceeded to make a right turn. The two vehicles collided in the intersection. This case determines liability for the collision and explores a driver's duty of care in the circumstances.
Madam Justice Baker referenced sections 173 (Yield Signs), 175 (Entering Through Highway) and 186 (Stopping at Intersections) of the Motor Vehicle Act in her decision.
She found that Mr. Kim had stopped as required and could safely enter the intersection. He was entitled to expect that Ms. Levonne would stop as well.
Although I think Madam Justice Baker reached the appropriate conclusion, it's my belief that she erred in her legal references.
At no point did she refer to Section 169 (Starting Vehicle), which along with Section 186, is what makes 4-Way Stops (and also intersections where the traffic lights have quit working) actually work. There are no 4-Way stops in the MVA, as a legal concept. Just the idea of a main road (defined by the cross streets having stop or yield signs.
But also, I don't believe that Section 173 applies here; but rather, it was designed to give right of way to the vehicle on the right at uncontrolled intersections, while all other situations will be controlled by signs or lights. Anybody else have an opinion on this?
- Log in to post comments
- Log in to post comments
Just my opinion, but ...