SINGAPORE: In November, a video making the rounds on social media showed a woman crossing the road despite a red man signal.
In-car camera footage captured her being hit by the vehicle, and tumbling to the ground.
Earlier in 2024, a driver was jailed for two months and disqualified from driving for eight years after he hit and killed a teenager – who was similarly crossing the road against a red traffic light signal for pedestrians.
Who’s responsible in an accident between motorists and road users?
The initial questions will be on who caused the accident and who has the right of way, DL Law Corporation legal associate Ganesan Nachiappan said.
Liability – or in layman terms, who bears the blame – is determined upon assessing such circumstances leading to the accident.
“Even when the pedestrian is at fault, a portion of the liability is still assigned to the driver, as drivers have a duty of care to other road users,” he said.
Factors to be considered include whether the motorist was speeding or keeping a proper lookout as well as obeying traffic rules.
While pedestrians in general bear less liability, they may take on more in cases where their actions contributed to the accident, Mr Ganesan added.
For instance, when the red man sign is on and pedestrians proceed to cross the road, they are instantly accepting liability as they are putting their lives and other road users’ lives at risk, he pointed out.
“Factors taken into account include the point in time or location of the pedestrian when the driver’s vehicle collides with the victim,” he said.
“If the pedestrian has just stepped off the kerb when the red man sign is on, the liability is, in most cases, against the pedestrian.”
A 2004 High Court judgment, on the case of a motorcyclist that knocked down and killed a jogger, sums it up.
“A user of our roads is always under a duty to keep a lookout. A failure to do so will invariably be viewed as negligence or contributory negligence on his part,” said then-Judicial Commissioner V K Rajah.
“This failure may be mitigated if it can be shown that the danger was concealed from him or that there were special circumstances allowing or inducing him to relax the normal standards of vigilance.”
