Dublin Bikes prove a big hit- but what about insurance for accidents?
The Dublin Bikes scheme has proved a big hit with Dubliners and visitors to the city since its launch in September.
One interesting legal issue arising from the use of the bikes is the question of insurance in case of an accident.
What happens if a cyclist hits a pedestrian and injures him or her whilst using one of these bicycles?
Well one thing is clear the promoters of the scheme have set out their position on their website in their terms and conditions section, it reads as follows;
‘You are not insured by the provider to use dublinbikes and you do so entirely at your own risk. It is advised that you take out your own public liability insurance if you do not have such a policy already in place.’
Well cycling safely is clearly the first step. It would also be a good idea to check your household insurance policy and see if it covers the householder in the use of a bicycle and more particularly the use of a hired bicycle!
Visitors to our site might let us know what response they get from their insurance company’s on this topic.
Safe cycling!
Paul Tracey
November 2009
Fatal Accidents – legal entitlements
In the case of a person suffers personal injury of such degree that they die of the injuries where liability (or fault) would lie in favour of the injured person, namely, where some otherperson is at fault for the injuries, the injured person’s right of action for compensation for pain and suffering ceases with the death of the injured person.
However, in these cases, under the Civil Liability Act 1961, a right of action continues, on the death of the injured person, in favour of the dependents(relatives) of the deceased person.
The method for the assessment of damages will differ from those applicable to a claim for ordinary personal injuries.
Instead, damages are calculated by reference to the Civil Liability Act in the sum of €25,394
Other headings of claim can be added to this namely financial loss to the dependents of the deceased person, arising from the death.
Loss arising from the absence of income would make up, by and large the greater share of this loss.
Funeral and travel expenses are recoverable.
In such cases the settlement of any such cases must be approved by the courts.
If you’d like further advise on this topic please contact Paul Tracey Solicitors at 01 8745656
or e mail law@traceysolicitors.ie
Road Accident compensation award reduced against drunk driver!
A significant Road Accident compensation award was reduced against drunk driver today where the injured party was aware of the consumption of alcohol by the driver .
The Supreme Court has ruled a young man who travelled in a car driven by another man whom he knew had several alcoholic drinks is 35 per cent liable for serious injuries suffered in a subsequent accident, not 15 per cent as found by a judge in the original High Court hearing.
On that basis, the three judge court today reduced to a €1.3 million damages award by High Court Judge Ray Moran to €890,000 arising from the accident in Co Tipperary 10 years ago.
The court dismissed arguments by the car driver’s legal team that the High Court should have dismissed Mr Moran’s entire case against the driver after it found as a fact Mr Moran got into a car with a driver whom he knew had been drinking.
The case arose from an accident on the night of April 23rd/24th 1999 when Mr Moran, Ashbrook Heights, Nenagh, Co Tipperary, was travelling as a front seat passenger in a car driven by Mr Fogarty, Sapwell, Ballingarry, Co Tipperary. Both men were drinking earlier in a bar in Nenagh and they and a woman friend all left the bar at closing time and travelled together in the car driven by Mr Fogarty.
On their homeward journey, the car collided with a wall and Mr Moran suffered head and other injuries as a result of which, it was claimed, he was physically unable to continue his apprenticeship as a block layer. It was also claimed he would have difficulty looking after himself into the future arising from his injuries.
Mr Moran later took High Court proceedings against Mr Fogarty and was awarded € 1.3 million damages, reduced to €1.1 million as a result of that court’s finding of 15 per cent contributory negligence by Mr Moran in getting into a car with a driver whom he knew had been drinking.
Mr Fogarty appealed against the award on several grounds, including that Mr Moran was not entitled to damages as the cause of his injuries was the accident and he would not have suffered those had he refused to travel with a driver whom he knew was intoxicated.
In a reserved judgment today, Mr Justice Joseph Finnegan, with whom the Chief Justice, Mr Justice John Murray and Ms Justice Susan Denham agreed, ruled the greater blameworthiness in the case must lie with the driver..
It was Mr Fogarty’s decision to drive to the bar in Nenagh and to drive home, notwithstanding the consumption of alcohol, the judge said. It was Mr Fogarty who had control of the car and its driving and it was he who represented a danger not just to
Mr Moran but other road users and the public in general. The accident was entitely attributable to Mr Fogarty’s driving.
consumed alcohol. They had also spent from about 8.30pm to at least 1am in the bar together and, in each other’s presence, drank between six and nine alcoholic drinks over that time.
Mr Moran knew, or certainly ought to have known, Mr Fogarty’s ability to drive was impaired by drink and, quite clearly, he ought not to have driven, the judge said.
Given all the circumstances, the judge said the aportionment of 15 per cent fault to Mr Moran represented “a significant disroportion” between the respective blameworthiness of the two. The court would set aside the 15 per cent finding and replace it with one of 35 per cent for Mr Moran and 65 per cent for Mr Fogarty.
The case shows the balancing a court must take into account when dealing with drunk driving cases. Clearly people who are injured at the hands of drunk drivers are entitled to compensation for their injuries. Those however who consent to travel with drivers whom they know to be drunk have to have regard for the risk they are undertaking when they do so.
The case does not set a precedent for all such cases as clearly the circumstances of each case must be taken into account.
Paul Tracey
21/07/2009
