CASE LAW - Russell v Parks

BC Courts Coat of ArmsThis is the story of Lenord Russell, who exited a bakery in a mall and walked forward into a parking stall at the same time that Kenneth Parks drove into it to park his vehicle. A collision occurred in which Mr. Russell suffered injury to his knee and foot. The case before the court was to decide who was liable for the collision and discusses first that the mall parking lot is a highway and then goes on to examine the duties that Mr. Russell and Mr. Parks had to each other as pedestrian and driver.

Link:

Read the Reasons for Judgment - Russell v Parks

Comments

home town reading

Thanks. But Really? walk into a moving vehical,and then try to sue?

Would,nt that be a good Scam for people that need some money,I can,t Imagine getting myself in that position,and then Waisting Valuable Court Time trying to rake in on my Mistake!

Hope you see this Lenord.

Who gets the missing 1/3%?

Must be a typo in the judgment......or else something other than the Plaintiff and Defendant contributed 1/3% to the cause of the collision - 66 1/3 plus 33 1/3 don't get us to 100%?

Given the relative risk of harm between the two negligent parties, I probably would have gone 50-50, rather than 1/3 - 2/3's.  If a negligent pedestrian runs into another pedestrian or car while keeping an inadequate lookout, there are much less dire consequences to another person/property than when you've got a driver negligently operating a motor vehicle.  My gut tells me that the negligent behavior that produces the greater risk should have a higher standard of care attached to it  Still, it's a "judgment", and we don't all have to necessarily agree for it to be a "good judgment".  Seems well-reasoned to me.

Law vs Life

Personally if I was walking and was STUPID ENOUGH to put myself in a position to be hit by a motor vehical,I sure can,t imagine sueing the driver.

Same when I drove Semi,If I got hit by a train you think for a minute I would blame that train? NOT.

Simple Physics dictates if it,s bigger than you,,,It has the right of way,Now if I was on a golfcourse playing golf and a car came flying through the bush,out of nowhere and hit me,,well then Ya,,I would sue,,If I am somewhere cars are goiing to be,,like parking lot,road,hwy,,,It,s Real Easy,,,PAY ATTENTION! It,s Your Life,,,and You Only Get One of those,and you stand a good chance of losing it if YOU DON,T PAY ATTENTION.

150-200lbs never goes well up against 2000-3000lbs,espessaly when the bigger weight is moving,and with a good chance nowadays that the driver is on the phone or playing with their GPS,changing the radio station ect,,They Arent paying atten,,So You BETTER!

But if you want to walk into that crosswalk,,Because You Have the Right of way,without paying attention,Well then you might stand a good chance of beiing in the right,,,,,(DEAD RIGHT)

Just Saying

Accidents happen. People make mistakes.

Thankfully, the laws of physics are not the only laws that govern human behavior.  In a civil society human behavior is regulated by a system of laws that are meant to equalize the rights of individuals, or at least attempt to do so, in a rational way.

The biggest kid in the school yard doesn't get to have all of the other kids' lunch money because he's the biggest.

You're personal experiences and abilities to (apparently) never enter upon a road, highway, parking lot or other public way as a pedestrian when there are motor vehicles accessing the same areas are somewhat unique.  For most of us, we end up having to share pedestrian and vehicular space (if only to get to our parked vehicle).

Justice Abrioux found as a fact that if the driver of the vehicle had been paying attention, he could have avoided running the pedestrian over - and that's why the driver was found to bear some fault for the collision.  Just because you're "bigger" doesn't mean that you can close your eyes and let everyone else get out of your way - and if they don't, that's their problem.

I entirely agree with you that both pedestrians and motorists are often guilty of not paying enough attention to each other, and that pedestrians usually end up the worse off because of it.  That doesn't excuse drivers from their obligation to take reasonable care for themselves and others, nor excuse them from responsibility for their negligent conduct.

...and the above isn't meant to be a personal attack.  Just a few suggestions for you to perhaps look at the issues a little differently.  Forgive my pointy sense of humour.  I'm Scottish.  ;^)

Love your sense of Humour

And no worries, I,m Human,I,m allowed to be Wrong. It,s in the Rules,lol And Yes I am quit Unique,It is not that I don,t share the same space,I do, It is just that me personally take full responsability for my Own Life and refuse to put myself in front of or behind any Motor Vehical regaurdless if its on a road,parking lot or any public place, Even in a controlled crosswalk I more pay attention to the Driver more so than the vehical itself,even if it,s allready stopped.

In the 70,s 80,s I spent around a year travelling in Mexico,a month to 3 months at a time,back then if you got hit by a motor vehical,,well tough luck for you,it had the right of way,If you lived there was no such thing as sueing the driver,just plain lucky to still be alive.Mexico City your on one side of the street looking across 14 lanes of traffic to get to the other side,Now Knowing the motor vehical has the right of way and you need across,,,well I am still hear living,,and yes I crossed may roads in mexico city as a Pedestrian,Also one of my favorite places to drive,The City,s Population is higher than our whole Country Coast to Coast,So Yes sharing the same place,does that qualify enough for you?

And it,s not that I dissagree with the law or decision of the judge It,s because I drive like I walk,I try and pay atten to my whole enviroment in all directions as much as humanly possible.I don,t hit things,,things don,t hit me=live longer.

And if somehow you managed to sneek up on me and hit me (that would be a first) Don,t expect to be sued by me,unless it,s somewhere motor vehicals are not meant to be,,like the golf course is what I was saying,Just the way I live,at the same time if I was the driver that hit a pedestrian,I would personally have a tough time not excepting 100% responsabiliy,except in extreame exceptions,somthing totally out of my control.

Does that help you understand more,and looking at things a little differently is Always Good,Remeber I,m allowed to be wrong,,LOL

Google Ads