What is the test for a motorcyclist who claims that the driver in front of her vehicle failed to signal her intention to turn and, therefore, caused him to drive into her vehicle?

British Columbia, Canada


The following excerpt is from Ormiston v. I.C.B.C., 2012 BCSC 665 (CanLII):

In Janzen v. Heather, 2008 BCSC 229, a moped operator claimed that the driver in front of him came to a stop, failed to signal her intention to turn and, therefore, caused him to drive into the rear of her vehicle. Rogers J. made this comment about that position: 33. The plaintiff’s responsibility for the collision is obvious. He was travelling too closely behind the defendant, and he was not paying sufficient attention to what the defendant was doing. On his own evidence, and accepting for the moment that the defendant did not apply her turn signal, the plaintiff was aware that some change was happening with the defendant’s course of travel. He appreciated that she was slowing down. He said that he was prepared to stop if she stopped. In fact, the defendant’s car did effectively come to a stop relative to the plaintiff’s path of travel. Her right turn brought her car across his pathway and formed a barrier to his progress. I find that the plaintiff was following so closely behind the defendant’s car that he could not have stopped behind the defendant. In fact, he was so close behind the defendant that if she had stopped without turning, he would have come abreast of her car before he, too, braked to a halt. 35. The key issue in this case is whether the defendant had a duty to perceive that the plaintiff was behind her and was so close to the rear of her vehicle that she could not make her turn without jeopardizing his safety. 40. ...Whether the defendant applied her turn signal or not, it was the plaintiff’s duty to stay far enough back from the defendant’s car to respond safely to whatever the defendant did. The defendant did not owe a duty to the plaintiff to yield or give way to him. The fact that the defendant did not see the plaintiff does not, therefore, give rise to a breach of a duty of care. The plaintiff was solely responsible for the collision.

Other Questions


Is s. 193 of the Motor Vehicle Act, or is it permissible for a driver to cause a vehicle to move? (British Columbia, Canada)
In a motor vehicle accident case, is a driver allowed to drive his vehicle while unlicensed? (British Columbia, Canada)
In a motor vehicle accident involving a stolen vehicle, can the driver of the stolen vehicle be held liable for damages? (British Columbia, Canada)
In a motor vehicle accident where a bee flew into the vehicle, landed on the driver's stomach and he froze, can the driver be found to have been negligent? (British Columbia, Canada)
Is resolution of an important part of a claim against a party in a personal injury claim against the other party to the claim substantially less impact on the balance of the claim? (British Columbia, Canada)
Is a truck driver entitled to assume that other drivers would be paying attention to their signal lights? (British Columbia, Canada)
Can a driver who overtakes a vehicle making a U-turn be held liable for failing to stop? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the liability of a deaf driver who fails to hear a police vehicle's siren? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the test for a driver who registers below the 50mg/100ml limit for driving under the Vehicle Accident Prevention Act? (British Columbia, Canada)
Does a wilfully false statement in a motor vehicle accident claim constitute material material to another claim? (British Columbia, Canada)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.