Settlement obtained for client after fatal road traffic collision

The collision happened when weather conditions and visibility were good. The motorcyclist was travelling southbound at a speed above the limit for the road. The motorcycle’s front headlight was not illuminated and the rider was wearing dark clothing.

A car was approaching in the opposite direction. The driver was unfamiliar with the road and had missed an earlier turn. When she reached the next right turn, she failed to adequately pause to check for approaching traffic. The car turned right across the motorcycle’s lane, resulting in the fatal collision.

The car driver denied responsibility for the collision. She said that she had checked for oncoming traffic before making the turn but had not seen the motorcycle approaching.

There were also factors relating to the motorcycle that had to be considered. The rider had been travelling above the speed limit, the motorcycle’s headlight was not illuminated and the rider was wearing dark clothing. This meant the evidence surrounding the collision needed careful investigation.

Our lawyers obtained the extensive police material relating to the collision. This included the driver’s witness statement taken at the time and black box data from her car. We also instructed an accident reconstruction expert to analyse the available evidence.

The expert’s analysis identified important evidence about the moments before the collision. The car’s black box data showed that it had continued in one fluid movement as it turned across the oncoming lane. This contradicted the driver’s police statement, in which she said she had stopped to check for approaching traffic.

The accident reconstruction expert also established from the police material that, had the driver looked, the motorcycle was there to be seen.

Although the motorcycle and rider were not clearly illuminated, the expert found that the motorcycle could be seen against the light brown fencing alongside a footpath next to the road. This evidence helped our specialists build the case on responsibility for the collision.

Despite the ongoing dispute over responsibility, an early interim payment was secured for the family.

This reimbursed the cost of the funeral and provided the Statutory Bereavement Award to the surviving spouse. It meant financial support could be provided before the claim reached its final conclusion.

Our lawyers pursued the claim on behalf of the Estate under the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1934 and on behalf of the Dependants under the Fatal Accidents Act 1976. A Grant of Probate was obtained for our client so that the claim for the Estate could be brought.

The detailed investigation enabled our specialists to establish a case against the car driver on primary liability. The remaining risk to our client concerned contributory negligence and litigation risk.

In simple terms, contributory negligence can arise where the actions of the person who was injured or died are relevant to how responsibility is divided. In this case, the source identifies the remaining risk as contributory negligence and/or the general risks involved in litigation.

Our specialists were able to build and value the claim on behalf of the Estate and Dependants at seven figures. Negotiations then took place with the car driver’s representatives.

A sum of compensation was agreed following those negotiations and subsequently approved by the Court. The source does not give the final settlement figure, so the distinction between the seven-figure valuation and the eventual agreed compensation has been retained.

The outcome followed a careful investigation of the collision and detailed consideration of evidence that went beyond the driver’s account. The police material, black box data and accident reconstruction evidence were central to establishing the circumstances in which the collision occurred.