Driver wins appeal after judge finds cyclist’s negligence contributed to accident

The cyclist had not stopped before crossing and was hit by Yeo when he entered. When the collision happened, Yeo stopped and called an ambulance.

The victim sustained a spinal fracture and underwent surgery for posterior spinal instrumentation and stabilisation.

His doctor said he should not suffer any permanent injuries following the incident, and gave him 72 days of medical leave.

HIGH COURT RULING

The District Judge had arrived at Yeo’s sentence after considering his multiple compounded traffic-related offences, including a careless driving offence in 2019 and his failure to conform to a red light in 2024.

The initial ruling also considered Yeo’s cooperation with the authorities, assistance rendered to the victim and guilty plea. 

The District Judge ruled that the cyclist’s negligence had no bearing on Yeo’s culpability as the victim had precedence at the zebra crossing and Yeo should have exercised extra care regardless of whether the cyclist stopped.

However, the High Court ruled that in this case Yeo’s moral culpability was affected by the victim’s behaviour, noting that cyclists had certain duties at crossings. 

After reviewing Yeo’s in-car camera footage, the High Court found that the victim breached his obligations by failing to travel at a speed that would allow him to stop at the zebra crossing and not stopping to check for oncoming traffic. The cyclist was also issued a stern warning for his conduct.

The cyclist’s failure to approach at a speed that would have allowed him to stop reduced the time Yeo had to react, while his failure to check for oncoming traffic further lowered the chances of the driver noticing him, said Justice Dedar Singh Gill J.  

The fact that Yeo slowed as he approached the zebra crossing was significant because it showed that if the victim had stopped, it was not “inconceivable” that the driver would also have stopped, said the judge.

He also disagreed with the finding that the case fell within the higher end of “lesser harm”, pointing out that the overall extent of harm to the victim fell short of past cases with the same classification.

However, he upheld the earlier finding that Yeo flouted traffic rules, noting that he failed to stop at the zebra crossing, which breached his obligation to allow the cyclist free and uninterrupted passage.

Overall, the judge ruled that the case warranted a fine instead of a jail sentence as it involved “lesser harm”, pegged at the middle of the spectrum, and “lower culpability” at the lowest end of the spectrum. 

While there were several mitigating factors, such as Yeo’s cooperation with the authorities and early guilty plea, the maximum fine was warranted due to his compounded traffic offences, said the judge. 

Yeo’s five-year disqualification period from driving also remains.