Failing to Take Reasonable Care

Road users, drivers, cyclists and pedestrians, have a duty to take reasonable care for themselves and others. If they do not follow the traffic rules they assume a heightened duty of care according to the courts. In this case both the driver and the cyclist involved failed to do so and collided with each other.

The Cyclist

Sarup Deol was riding his bicycle southbound on a sidewalk beside the northbound lanes Scott Road in the 7400 block. He approached the exit from the Strawberry Hill Shopping Centre and stopped on the sidewalk.

He saw an approaching car stop at the entry to Scott Road and proceeded to cross the exit.

The Driver

Brian Veach was exiting the parking lot and intended to make a right turn onto Scott Road northbound. He looked to his right and stopped before making his turn.

Thinking that it was safe to proceed, he began to enter Scott Road but did not look to his right before he did so.

View of the Collision Location

The Collision

Mr. Deol and Mr. Veach collided with each other in the unmarked crosswalk. Mr. Veach's car stopped on top of Mr. Deol's bicycle, pinning one of his legs between the bicycle and the pavement.

Failing to Take Reasonable Care

Justice Dardi ruled as follows:

[26]         I find on the totality of the evidence that had the defendant acted in a reasonably prudent manner he would have seen the plaintiff. The plaintiff was there to be seen by the defendant. Had the defendant maintained a proper look-out there is an irresistible inference that the collision would have been avoided. I therefore conclude that the defendant failed to meet the standard of care of an ordinarily prudent driver required in the circumstances, and that his failure to do so was a cause of the accident. In the result I find the defendant negligent.

[32]         On the totality of the evidence, and applying the principles articulated in Bradley, I find that the plaintiff failed to take reasonable care for his own safety. Given his heightened duty of care, the plaintiff, after stopping and before attempting to cross the Exitway, should have made some form of eye contact to ensure that the defendant had seen him. By the plaintiff’s own admission the defendant had given no indication to the plaintiff that he had seen him. In short, the plaintiff was at fault and his failure to take reasonable care for his own safety was one of the causes of the accident.

She determined liability for the crash at 75% for Mr. Veach and 25% for Mr. Deol.

Learn More

• Read the Reasons for Judgment - Deol v Veach

Share This Article