Does a driver have to be held liable for failing to stop at a red light?

Counsel also references Pallister v. Nicholson (1991) N.S.R. 440 where the defendant was intending to make a left turn and while the plaintiff saw the defendant’s vehicle with its indicator light on, formed the impression he was stopped and did not focus her attention on him until the moment of the collision. As noted by the defendant, Justice Nunn, in his reasons, at p. 2, commented: On the whole of the evidence, there is no doubt that the defendant is liable as he was negligent is [sic] attempting to make a left turn in the face of oncoming traffic when it was not safe for him to do so. As well, however, the plaintiff was not without some fault. This is generally a busy intersection and “a glance” at the approaching vehicle which was signalling a left turn was not enough. While checking other traffic is quite normal, her main attention should have been directed to the approaching vehicle. As well she should have reduced her speed, in these circumstances, as she approached. One cannot presume that having the green light entitles an operator of a vehicle to proceed through at regular speed believing that every other driver will yield the right of away. I am satisfied that the plaintiff fell below the standard of care required in this situation as she should have anticipated the possibility of danger and “a glance” at the most likely vehicle to cause harm and paying no further attention to it is not enough. Defensive driving involves anticipation and care. The apportionment of liability varies from case to case and depends upon the circumstances of each. In this case the major portion of liability must rest upon the defendant, as he must have been aware of the approaching vehicle of the plaintiff and that she had the right of way and he could not have made his turn safely. I would therefore assess his liability at 75% and the plaintiff’s at 25%.