Road Traffic Accident in UK Law

The whole purpose of introducing Section II of Part 45 was to impose a somewhat rough and ready system in a limited class of cases because the commercial interests behind the parties, who bear the burden of large numbers of such cases, considered that, taken overall, it was fair and saved both time and money. If the appellants' argument were correct, the acceptance of a Part 36 offer would always result in an order for costs on the standard basis in low-value road traffic accident cases.

In my judgment on the facts of this case there was an inexorable progression from the moment when the fit occurred as a result of the failure of the hospital properly to diagnose and then to treat the baby, the fit causing the brain damage which shortly thereafter made termination of this child's life inevitable and the dreadful climax when the child died in her arms. It is a seamless tale with an obvious beginning and an equally obvious end.

Everyone knows, or should know, that the consumption of even small quantities of alcohol undermines the ability of any driver to apply his full concentration to the road. Where the consumption is high, it is effectively extinguished. Alcohol makes a driver personally unfit to drive, and the car of which he is in control becomes as dangerous with him at the wheel as if it were subject to a serious known, potentially fatal, mechanical defect.

While I am unable to accept that their impact is likely to be as dramatic as the Krause paper contends, I nevertheless consider that these favourable factors should be given weight in assessing life expectancy in the present case. In this regard I attach particular importance to my finding that the Claimant will use his award to purchase high quality care and medical services.

I consider that in the present case the experts, in assessing the life expectancy of the Claimant, have taken account not only of the consequences of his spinal injury but have also factored into their assessment a wide range of other individual factors particular to the Claimant not arising from his spinal injury.

A road traffic accident is one of the commoner cases, for such events are only too often the result of a combination of acts or omissions on the part of two or more persons. It must, however, be a cause which is more than de minimis, more than minimal: see R v Hennigan (1971) 1 All ER 133.

It is easy enough to take the view that justice requires a short extension of time to be granted even where the reason for the failure to serve is the incompetence of the claimant's solicitor, especially if the claim is substantial. Moreover, the claim form does not have to contain full details of the claim. All that is required is a concise statement of the nature of the claim: see CPR 16.2(1) (a) .