PERSONAL INJURY & ACCIDENT COMPENSATION
Seat belt and compensation.Swansea/Newport/Cardiff
Failure to wear a selt belt will obiously make any road traffic accident injury far worse than if the person was wearing a selt belt. This matter was examined in the case of Froome v Butcher (1976) QB 286. In this case, the claimant bwas driving along, on the correct side of the road, not a speed, but was not wearing a set belt. The defendant was driving at speed on the wrong side of the road and collided with the claimant’s motor car. Lord Denning held that there were three situations where not wearing a selt belt would be relevant. They are as follows:
If wearing a seat belt would have made no difference, then there would be no reduction in compensation for contributory negligence.
If wearing a seat belt would have reduced injuries, there will be a 15% reduction in damages.
If wearing a seat belt would have prevented the injuries altogether, there will be a 25% reduction in the compensation.
However, in the case of Condon v Condon [1978] RTR 483, the court held that the claimant suffered from ’seat belt phobia’ and declined to reduce the compensation.
In Hitchens v Berkshire County Council , the claimant was fataly injured, but it was shown that if he had been wearing a seat belt, then he would have survived and suffered perhaps only minor injuries. At first instance, the Judge said he was bound by Froome v Butcher, but if if were up to him, he would have applied a discount of at least 50% and possibly as much as 60% to 70%. The judge however applied a discount of 15%. Althought the case was listed for appeal, the parties arrived at a settlement at the door of the Court of Appeal. They agreed a 50% reduction. The Court of Appeal approved this. So in effect, the Court of Appeal did not properly hear the case, it did not decide the case but just rubber stamped it.
In Jones v Wilkins, LJ Keene opined that it would be a very rare situation where the 25% discount would be increased. In Parkinson v Chief Constable of Dyfed [2004] EWCA Civ 802 , Froome v Butcher was approved. In Takers v Thorne, the learned judge did not follow Hitchen and applied a 25% discount as the correct figure, where a person would have most probably survived if a seat belt had been worn.
If you have suffered any type of road traffic accident injury, cycle injury, motor cycle crash, pedestrian accident, passenger accident, bus, coach, train, aircraft accident, then please telephone us for immediate help and legal advice. We can help you right now, just pick up the ‘phone.
We deal with road traffic accident throughout England and Wales, from Ispwich to Ilminster, from Neath to Northampton, from Port Talbot to Peterborough. Where ever you are, ring us now.
Leave a Reply
