CNA Explains: Who’s to blame in accidents involving motorists and jaywalkers?

SINGAPORE: In November, a film making the rounds on social media showed a female crossing the road despite a dark man message.

In-car lens footage captured her being hit by the car, and tumbling to the ground.

A pilot earlier in 2024 was  incarcerated for two weeks and disqualified from driving for eight times after hitting and killing a girl who was crossing the road against a red traffic light for walkers.

In a collision between a driver and a path user, who is accountable? &nbsp,

According to DL Law Corporation legitimate affiliate Ganesan&nbsp, Nachiappan, the first inquiry will be on who caused the accident and who has the right of way. &nbsp,

When such factors are considered when determining liability, or in public terms, who bears the blame, the outcome is determined.

A percentage of the responsibility is also assigned to the driver, he said, because drivers have a duty to be considerate of other road users. &nbsp,

Whether the driver was speeding, keeping a correct lookout, or following traffic regulations are other factors that need to be taken into account.

While pedestrians generally bear less of the brunt of the blame, they may assume more in situations where their activities contributed to the incident, according to Mr. Ganesan. &nbsp,

He noted that when walkers cross the road while the dark man signal is on, they are immediately accepting responsibility for putting their lives and those of other road users in danger. &nbsp,

” The point in time or location of the commuter when the driver’s car collides with the victim are elements taken into account,” he said.

” If the motorist has just stepped off the curb when the dark man signal is on, the duty is, in most cases, against the commuter”.

A 2004 High Court wisdom, on the event of a motorist that knocked down and killed a pedestrian, sums it up. &nbsp,

” A road user is always expected to keep a watch out .” A failing to do so will always be viewed as neglect or contributing neglect on his part, according to then-Judicial Commissioner V K Rajah.

If it can be demonstrated that he was unaware of the threat or that particular circumstances made it possible for him to relax the accepted standards of vigilance, then this failure may be attained.