The following PI & Clinical Negligence practice note provides comprehensive and up to date legal information covering:
The question of whether a road user has failed to drive with reasonable care is fact sensitive.
Evidence of negligence may be gleaned from the following sources:
the Highway Code
relevant motoring convictions
Driving Standards Agency (DSA) driving manuals and other specialist publications
In addition, there are certain cases where the circumstances themselves imply negligence. In such cases, the principle of res ipsa loquitur ('the thing speaks for itself') may apply.
In principle, a breach of the Highway Code may be relied upon as tending to establish or negate any liability that is in question in proceedings.
In practice, if a party fails to comply with the provisions of the Highway Code, it is likely that the court will conclude that there has been a breach of the duty of care. This is for good reason: the Highway Code is accepted good practice and represents the accumulation of many years' experience since it was first published in 1931.
It is still necessary, however, to establish that the particular breach was causative, ie that it contributed to the accident.
In Goad it was held:
'A failure to observe the Highway Code might be evidence of negligence causing or contributing to
**Trials are provided to all LexisPSL and LexisLibrary content, excluding Practice Compliance, Practice Management and Risk and Compliance, subscription packages are tailored to your specific needs. To discuss trialling these LexisPSL services please email customer service via our online form. Free trials are only available to individuals based in the UK. We may terminate this trial at any time or decide not to give a trial, for any reason. Trial includes one question to LexisAsk during the length of the trial.
To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial.
Existing user? Sign-in
Take a free trial
This Practice Note considers proprietary estoppel from a generic standpoint.For industry specific guidance on proprietary estoppel, see Practice Notes:•Estoppel and property law•Mortgages by estoppelProprietary estoppel—what is it?Unlike the other forms of estoppel (see Practice Note: Estoppel—what,
When is quantum meruit and quantum valebat relevant?Claims in quantum meruit (value of services) and quantum valebat (value of goods) arise in diverse situations ranging from where contractual terms are silent on issues of payment to where there is no contract at all (Serck v Drake & Scull).General
Millett LJ subdivided types of constructive trust into two categories, distinguishing between:•the constructive trust proper, where equity intervenes to prevent the legal owner from unconscionably denying the beneficial interest of another (known as the institutional constructive trust)•the
A limited company that proposes to issue redeemable shares must comply with the provisions of the Companies Act 2006 (CA 2006).Why do companies issue redeemable shares?A company may wish to issue redeemable shares so that it has an alternative way to return surplus capital to shareholders without
0330 161 1234
To view our latest legal guidance content,sign-in to Lexis®PSL or register for a free trial.