Louise Jane Palmer v Russell Timms & Ors
[2024] EWHC 2292 (KB)
John Mills v The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis
8 February 2024
[2024] EWHC 273 (KB)
High Court
A police officer hit a pedestrian while responding to an emergency. The court blamed both the officer (mostly) and the pedestrian (partly) for the accident. The pedestrian's children tried to get money, claiming their father would have supported them financially, but they didn't have enough proof, so they didn't get much money.
Key Facts
- •Fatal road traffic accident involving a police van and a pedestrian (Mr. Mills) on July 12, 2017.
- •Sergeant Upton, the police driver, was responding to an emergency with sirens and flashing lights.
- •Mr. Mills was crossing the road against a red pedestrian signal.
- •Dashcam footage played a crucial role in reconstructing the accident.
- •Delay in obtaining Sergeant Upton's initial account raised concerns about the police investigation.
- •Contributory negligence of both Sergeant Upton and Mr. Mills was alleged.
- •Claims for loss of dependency were brought by Mr. Mills' children, Jane and James.
- •The issue of Mr. Mills' financial capacity to provide future support to his children was central to the dependency claims.
Legal Principles
Liability in road traffic accidents requires establishing a breach of duty of care.
Common law negligence
Contributory negligence reduces damages based on the claimant's share of responsibility.
Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945
Assessment of contributory negligence considers the relative culpability of the parties, with a higher burden often placed on drivers.
Eagle v Chambers [2003] EWCA Civ 1107
Loss of dependency claims require proving the deceased's intention and ability to provide future financial support.
Common law
Police officers responding to emergencies have to balance rapid progress with avoiding disproportionate dangers to other road users. The test is reasonable foresight, not hindsight.
Roadcraft – The Police Driver’s Handbook
Outcomes
Sergeant Upton was found primarily liable for the accident due to failure to keep a proper lookout.
Despite the emergency, Sergeant Upton's attention was diverted, and a timely reaction would have prevented the collision.
Contributory negligence of 50% was attributed to Mr. Mills for crossing the road carelessly.
Mr. Mills crossed against a red pedestrian signal and failed to react to audible sirens.
Dependency claims for Jane and James were largely dismissed due to insufficient evidence of Mr. Mills' commitment to provide financial support.
Lack of clear evidence of financial commitment, significant prior gifts, and strained family relationships undermined the claims. Mr Mills' gift of a substantial property to one child cast doubt on his intention to provide substantial future support for the others.
Nominal damages awarded for potential small future donations.
Acknowledging a small chance Mr. Mills may have made modest donations in the future.