High court rules cattles on road cant be blamed for accidents. The driver is responsible!

  • Thread starter Thread starter sTrOnTiaBOnd
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 14
  • Views Views 1,372
I think its right judgement. I agree with reasons given in that article.
 
So... If I end up having an accident trying to prevent myself from ramming into a cow on the road, it is negligent driving? I should just ram into the cow? Ok. Would try to remember next time. Hopefully PETA would not sue me for hurting the animal instead of taking preventive action.
 
Thats what highcourt is trying to say. How does one really prove if its cattle's fault or not?

If you run on to human, its still becomes case of negligent driving. (Even if that person was actually trying to commit suicide)

Cattle can not be careful, its going to remain dumb. So if there is someone to blame it has to be driver.

Or if there is owner of cattle, then may be you can prove that owner let cattle lose.
 
How is it negligent driving on my part if I hit another person because an animal came on the road suddenly and forced me to deviate from my path or I braked and he hit me from behind? I get it, the animal is stupid and he cannot be held responsible. But how does that make me negligible? I have awareness of the law but I am not a Psychic.
 
In the above case it appears that guy claimed compensation on that basis.

Which was first rejected by Motor accident claim tribunal and then high court.

High court is just trying to say that in such cases, burden goes on to driver. Probably because otherwise it becomes to complex.
 
The point here is why the f*** can't cattle movement on busy roads be regulated? though it should not be allowed at all.
 
Regulating cattle movement is very difficult task. It simply cannot be done or enforced effectively.
But driver should not be blamed for negligence just because court couldn't find any other party to put the blame.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back