Don't confuse civil law, where you are alleging negligence, with criminal law, where a person is accuse of an offence (in this case opening the door). The criminal offence of permitting to be opened does not in and of itself create a duty of care under the civil law, although it might strongly indicate that one may exist. Damages are claimed under civil law, not as a result of a criminal conviction.
Doored by Police Car
- Thread starter Trickedem
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Andy Roadie
Well-Known Member
A google of the stone scenario suggests the driver is not liable.
In a standard Car I cannot prevent the passenger opening the door i.e I don't have remote locks. So I can't really permit to be opened.
As a Private Hire driver I don't really have the option of choosing my passengers. Many are completely addled by Drugs or Alcohol.
I guess I will find out when it happens then.
In a standard Car I cannot prevent the passenger opening the door i.e I don't have remote locks. So I can't really permit to be opened.
As a Private Hire driver I don't really have the option of choosing my passengers. Many are completely addled by Drugs or Alcohol.
I guess I will find out when it happens then.
GrumpyGregry
Here for rides.
Merely asserting a thing over and over again does not make that thing necessarily so. Nor overturn statue and case law.
Indeed. Saying it louder doesn't make it more true.
Andy Roadie
Well-Known Member
Can you give a link to these cases? All I can find is conjecture.
For example, I find old news stories about a cyclist is suing for £200,000 for being doored but not what the actual result was.
You give examples of when a driver has control of the door locks. So I explained that I don't have this control.
For example, I find old news stories about a cyclist is suing for £200,000 for being doored but not what the actual result was.
You give examples of when a driver has control of the door locks. So I explained that I don't have this control.
You might not confuse the two, but lots of people do. And why the attitude?
T4tomo
Legendary Member
A couple of reasons why driver may be responsible for passenger opening the door:
- As the driver you have 3 mirrors all adjusted for you to look at. It's not unreasonable as you stop for you to check those mirrors and if you see a cyclist approaching warn your passenger not to open the door.
- As the driver you have stopped the car in an unsafe place to exit your passengers, as they are, as a matter of fact, putting third parties in danger by the act of opening the door.
mjr
Comfy armchair to one person & a plank to the next
- Location
- mostly Norfolk, sometimes Somerset
You might find something on http://www.bailii.org but I didn't spot it among all the motorists arguing about liability for damaging their passenger doors in other ways
I did find an Irish case (and we still share similar laws in many things, originally from UK rule and now from membership of the EU and - relevantly for traffic law - the UN) [2013] IEHC 505 where a driver was held not to be liable for the passengers egging nearby people, but would have been "Had there been any evidence of a discussion of “egging” pedestrians." "This may well be selective amnesia but there is no evidence that the driver was warned or ought to have known that this was a likelihood. I am of the view that it would be unreasonable to import upon him the knowledge that an egg was going to be thrown or might be thrown in the direction of the plaintiff from his car." "Therefore, I with regret I must dismiss this action."
ETA: Earlier in the same: "In Curley v. Mannion [1965] I.R. 543, the defendant who was the owner and driver of a motor vehicle which was parked on its correct side of the road was held liable to a cyclist pedestrian who suddenly without warning was hit by the passenger door being opened by a passenger child of the defendant who did not look to see the coast was clear."
I would be surprised if an English driver wasn't held liable for not warning their passenger about what is visible in the driver's mirrors, but I can't find cases of it. It may be so widely accepted that no-one has disputed it for so long that there are no easily-searchable cases.
Last edited:
