Driving Negligence in UK Law

Leading Cases
  • Rouse v Squires
    • Court of Appeal
    • 22 Mar 1973

    If a driver so negligently manages his vehicle as to cause it to obstruct the highway and constitute a danger to other road users, including those who are driving too fast or not keeping a proper lookout, but not those who deliberately or recklessly drive into the obstruction, then the first driver's negligence may be held to have contributed to the causation of an accident of which the immediate cause was the negligent driving of the vehicle which because of the presence of the obstruction collides with it or with some other vehicle or some other person.

  • Launchbury v Morgans
    • House of Lords
    • 09 May 1972

    For I regard it as clear that in order to fix vicarious liability upon the owner of a car in such a case as the present, it must be shown that the driver was using it for the owner's purposes, under delegation of a task or duty. The substitution for this clear conception of a vague test based on "interest" or "concern" has nothing in reason or authority to commend it.

    For the creation of the agency relationship it is not necessary that there should be a legally binding contrac of agency, but it is necessary that there should be a legally binding contract of agency, but it is necessary that there should be an instruction or request from the owner and an undertaking of the duty or task by the agent.

  • Froom v Butcher
    • Court of Appeal
    • 21 Jul 1975

    Negligence depends on a breach of duty, whereas contributory negligence does not. Negligence is a man's carelessness in breach of duty to others. Contributory negligence is a man's carelessness in looking after his own safety. He is guilty of contributory negligence if he ought reasonably to have foreseen that, if he did not act as a reasonable prudent man he might be hurt himself, see Jones v. Livox Quarries (1952) 2 Q.B. 608.

  • R v Fairbanks
    • Court of Appeal
    • 25 Jun 1986

    These cases bear out the conclusion, which we should in any event have reached, that the Judge is obliged to leave the lesser alternative only if this is necessary in the interests of justice.

  • Nettleship v Weston
    • Court of Appeal
    • 30 Jun 1971

    Nothing will suffice short of an agreement to waive any claim for negligence. The plaintiff must agree, expressly or impliedly, to waive any claim for any injury that may befall him due to the lack of reasonable care by the defendant: or, more accurately, due to the failure of the defendant to measure up to the standard of care that the law requires of him.

    Thus far I have considered the learner as the driver of the oar and the instructor as a passenger, albeit a very special kind of passenger. But I doubt whether that is the right way of looking at the problem. I prefer to regard the learner-driver and the instructor as both concerned in the driving. Together they must maintain the same measure of control over the car as an experienced skilled and careful driver would do.

See all results
Legislation
See all results
Books & Journal Articles
See all results
Law Firm Commentaries
  • Crime Doesn't Pay – Criminal Enterprise And Negligence
    • Mondaq UK
    ......At this stage, the lights had changed to green, and Mr Ferrer began driving off. As he turned the corner, Beaumont either fell or jumped from the taxi backwards, landing on his back and hitting his head. He sustained a ......
  • Crime Doesn't Pay – Criminal Enterprise And Negligence
    • Mondaq UK
    ...... At this stage, the lights had changed to green, and Mr Ferrer began driving off. As he turned the corner, Beaumont either fell or jumped from the taxi backwards, landing on his back and hitting his head. He sustained a ......
  • Clyde & Co Successfully Defend Claim On Behalf Of Fairground Owner
    • Mondaq UK
    ...... Trial. Contributory negligence on the part of the Claimant had been agreed by all parties at 12.5% before ... It was the driving of D1 which caused the accident; he should have seen the Claimant. ......
  • Contributory Negligence In Lung Cancer Claims
    • Mondaq UK
    ......However, it is likely public policy will the driving force in cases of this nature. A breach of statutory duty by the defendant will always be likely to be considered to be the principal cause. This ......
See all results