Green Light: Look Before You Go

A green light doesn't always mean go unless you've had a good look to make sure that there are no hazards present before you proceed. Jennifer Biggers learned this when the vehicle she was driving collided with Carol Murdoch, who was crossing quickly in a marked crosswalk against a red light at the intersection of Blanshard Street and Saanich Road in Victoria.

Carol Murdoch

Ms. Murdoch testified that she had been shopping at the Walmart store and was walking to meet a friend for coffee. She was crossing Blanshard Street from west to east, crossed two lanes and entered the third, using the marked crosswalk. 

She said that she made eye contact and then crossed in front of Ms. Biggers' Honda CRV.

Jennifer Biggers

Ms. Biggers was driving on Blanshard Street in the southbound fast lane and had stopped behind 3 or 4 vehicles at the red light. She saw Ms. Murdock run between two vehicles crossing from her right but was unable to stop in time to avoid a collision.

The Green Light

Justice Power observed that Ms. Biggers had the statutory right of way because she was proceeding on a green light.

She also found that Ms. Murdoch had left the traffic island crossing against both the red light and the don't walk sign.

Ms. Murdoch was reckless to enter the crosswalk, but the Justice could not decide if she crossed when it was impractical for Ms. Biggers to stop.

The Decision

[32]         In the case before me, I find that the defendant owed a duty of care to the plaintiff with regard to all of the circumstances that existed in the intersection at the time of the accident. Traffic was so heavy and congested that special caution should have been taken by the defendant as she approached the crosswalk even though she was proceeding on a green light.

[33]         In this case, I do not believe that the defendant exercised the appropriate standard of care to avoid breaching that duty. The drivers in vehicles in the two lanes to her right were able to observe and stop for the plaintiff, and a driver behind her (Ms. Larson) was able to see Ms. Murdoch. Mr. Lukinuk was able to observe that something was happening in his rear-view mirror. In the circumstances, I find that the defendant failed to keep a proper lookout by failing to observe Ms. Murdoch’s entry into the crosswalk and by failing to observe that vehicles in the two lanes to her right had stopped for Ms. Murdoch. I find that if the defendant had in fact been keeping a sufficient look out, she would have been able to stop for Ms. Murdoch and avoid the collision.

Blame for the collision was assessed at 75% for Ms. Murdoch and 25% for Ms. Biggers.

Learn More

• Read the Reasons for Judgment Murdoch v Biggers

Share This Article