A bicycle courier´s compensation claim for injuries in an accident with a taxi has been resolved at a hearing of the High Court before Mr Justice Barton.
Bicycle courier Rotimi Omotayo made his claim for injuries in an accident with a taxi after being knocked from his bicycle by Dublin taxi driver by Kenneth Griffin. Rotimi was cycling eastbound along Custom House Quay in March 2015, when Griffin pulled out from a stationary line of traffic without looking.
Although Griffin acknowledged that his manoeuvre had been negligent, he contested the claim for injuries in an accident with a taxi on the grounds that Rotimi had been cycling in the hatched markings between the two carriageways before the accident. The two men also disagreed about the angle of impact, and Rotimi´s loss of earnings due to his injuries.
Unable to conduct an assessment of Rotimi´s claim, the Injuries Board issued an Authorisation for the case to be heard at court. Due to the potential value of the claim, the case was recently heard at the High Court by Mr Justice Bernard Barton.
At the hearing, Judge Barton heard witnesses appearing on behalf of both parties give their account of how the accident happened. The judge concluded that the taxi driver´s account was closer to the actual events after expert witnesses testified that the only damage done to the taxi was a smashed wing mirror.
However, Judge Barton dismissed the claim of contributory negligence – stating that as Rotimi was going to turn right, he was entitled to be cycling in, or close to, the hatched markings between the two carriageways. The judge assigned full liability to Mr Griffin for pulling out into Rotimi´s path.
In relation to the settlement of the claim for injuries in an accident with a taxi, Judge Barton said that the Book of Quantum was “hopelessly out of date and of little assistance”. The judge applied the principals of Tort law to award Rotimi €30,000 compensation for general damages.
In respect of his claim for special damages, Judge Barton said there was insufficient evidence before the court to justify Rotimi´s alleged loss of earnings. Other items of special damages – including Rotimi´s legal costs – were allowed.