On Sat, 09 Aug 2014 01:12:14 +0100, mcp wrote:

On Fri, 8 Aug 2014 18:32:29 +0100, Jabba wrote:

An 'innocent' cyclist who injures their head in an accident and wasn't
wearing a helmet is going to receive a lower settlement. Ditto horse
riders.

Only if it can be proved that it would have made a difference.
Insurance companies like to try it on but it's never stood up in
court.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case 1.

Denis Moore, 50 admitted causing death by dangerous driving when he collided
with cyclist James Jorgensen, 55, in September 2008 on a roundabout in Seaham,
County Durham. Jorgensen died eight days later of severe head injuries.
Although the court was told that Moore was only driving at around 20mph,
Moore’s solicitor acknowledged that his client had suffered a “momentary lapse
of concentration”.

At Durham Crown Court last Friday, Judge Richard Lowden gave Moore a 24-week
suspended prison sentence. He said the fact that Jorgensen had not been wearing
a helmet was a “mitigating factor” and Moore’s sentence was reduced accordingly

================================================== ==================

Case 2.

However, when ruling on the case Justice Williams expressed the view that not
wearing a helmet could put a cyclist at fault and make them partly responsible
for their own brain damage. “There can be no doubt that the failure to wear a
helmet may expose the cyclist to risk of greater injury,” he stated. Subject to
limitations, “any injury sustained may be the cyclist’s own fault.”