Court rules drivers, pedestrians have equal responsibility on roads

The Court of Final Appeal has ruled that “drivers and pedestrians should exercise equal caution and attention when using public roads.”

The ruling was issued for a car accident in which a car had crashed into a pedestrian in Fai Chi Kei District. The court did not note the year or date of the accident.

According to the court, the accident happened when the driver, A, was driving a heavy vehicle, and made a right turn at Rua Norte do Patane towards Rua da Doca Seca,  crashing into victim, B, who was crossing the road illegally through a greening area on the sidewalk.

Charges were then pressed against A for aggravated physical assault by misconduct. Meanwhile, B filed civil procedures against A, A’s then employer – C – and insurance agency D which insured the vehicle.

In February 2022, the Court of First Instance heard the case. The criminal procedure was terminated as the victim withdrew it. The civil procedure, meanwhile, was accepted, and the court ruled that B bore 70% and A 30% of the stakes of the accident. In addition, D was ordered to pay B about MOP227,000 as compensation.

B filed an appeal with the Court of Second Instance, which ruled that A was the only liable party in the accident. Consequently, the insurance agency was ordered to pay about MOP773,000 instead.

The insurance agency then filed the final appeal.

The top court commented that identifying A as the sole responsible party was “inappropriate and unreasonable,” but added that it was obvious A led to the existence of the accident.

The court considered A’s driving was “careless and inappropriate,” judging from his continued velocity and his entering road separation areas during the turn. Nonetheless, B was not completely innocent either. The court added that while crossing the road, B did not pay attention to approaching traffic, nor cross at legal facilities but at a location that was difficult to see for A as a heavy vehicle driver. This led to B being partially responsible.

In addition, the court suggested that if a driver must abide by the Road Transport Law, all pedestrians must also do so. It added several principles that pedestrians should bear in mind, such as not suddenly entering vehicle lanes without being certain that they will not cause obstruction to road traffic.

Ruling A and B having 40% and 60% of responsibility respectively, the court ordered the insurer to pay about MOP310,000 to B as compensation.