Everybody knows that it’s against the law to travel in a car without wearing a seatbelt. They keep us safe. I know, from personal experience of the personal injury cases I have dealt with, that wearing a belt can make the difference between whiplash and tetraplegia in the event of an accident and what a difference that is.
Through the work I do at Slater and Gordon Lawyers I am often asked what happens to a legal claim if you’re injured in a road traffic collision but weren’t wearing a seatbelt? Well, in short, yes it is still possible to make a successful compensation claim if the accident was someone else’s fault. However, most claimants will find that their damages will be discounted by a percentage amount. The law says that people who don’t wear seatbelts must share some blame for their injuries.
For example, I recently represented a spinal cord injured claimant who wasn’t wearing a seatbelt when the taxi he was traveling in lost control. We went to trial on the seatbelt issue because the evidence was complicated. What we were arguing about in the case was the percentage deduction that should be applied to my client’s compensation. He admitted he wasn’t wearing a seatbelt; the question for the judge was how much blame should be attributed to my client for that omission? It’s a difficult question but fortunately the courts have developed some guidance on contributory negligence in seatbelt cases. The courts routinely apply a discount of either 15% or 25%, depending on what expert evidence is produced regarding the damage caused by failure to wear a seatbelt.
For my spinal cord injured client, the expert evidence was that he would have virtually avoided all injury if he was wearing a seatbelt so a 25% deduction was applied by the judge. But at Slater and Gordon, we argued it should have been 15% because the claimant would still have sustained some injury if wearing the belt. Unfortunately, on this occasion we were unable to convince the court of our argument but what we achieved was a thorough examination of the evidence through the instruction of expert evidence. Neither our client nor Slater and Gordon saw it as ‘losing’. We all accepted there was a risk and we were unwilling to simply accept a straight 25% deduction. It was important to us and our client that we went the extra mile.
The value of spinal cord injury claims can be very significant with loss of earnings and care costs being considerable. It is vital to explore the effects of any allegation of contributory negligence because even an extra 10% of financial compensation can make a huge difference to a claimant with serious injuries.
So is the law on seatbelt s here fair? Not in every situation. I certainly didn’t agree that my client, as an innocent passenger, should take a quarter of the blame for his injuries. However, the court rules provide some certainty for injured people and their legal teams, avoiding extensive examination of the parties’ blameworthiness based on the facts of each individual case.
Jenny Maloney is a Senior Associate at Slater and Gordon Lawyers. She represents seriously injured victims of road traffic collisions, accidents at work and criminal assaults in civil claims. Jenny is a regular speaker at the SIA study days for healthcare professionals.
The post Slater and Gordon: Seatbelts – the legal consequences appeared first on Spinal Injuries Association.