0370 270 6000

already registered?

Please sign in with your existing account details.

need to register?

Register to access exclusive content, sign up to receive our updates and personalise your experience on brownejacobson.com.

Privacy statement - Terms and conditions

Forgotten your password?

Arnott v Sprake & Another, Court of Appeal

26 February 2001
The issues

Duty Of Care to be Expected on Unclassified Roads from a Motorist.

The facts

The Claimant was driving a motorcycle on an unclassified rural road with a speed limit of 60 mph. He went around a left hand bend and collided with an agricultural vehicle driven by the First Defendants who was turning right into the lane from a junction on the Claimant’s left hand side.

There were no markings on the lane to indicate the approach to the junction. At first instance the Judge found the Defendants liable on the basis that the Claimant was travelling at 45mph and was unaware of the approaching junction. The bend in the lane was “unusually dangerous” and the width and length of the Defendant’s vehicle made it “an unusual vehicle”. There was a duty on the driver of the agricultural vehicle to place a warning triangle in the lane and/or switch on flashing lights and sound his horn as he turned.

The decision

There is no justification for the finding that point in the lane was unusually dangerous or that the farm vehicle was unusual. It was precisely the sort of junction that could be anticipated on a road of this type. The vehicle was a typical agricultural vehicle to be expected on country roads. The onus was on the driver on such a road to drive in a manner that would not put him at risk of being surprised by what was around the next bend.

Appeal allowed.

Focus on...

Legal updates

Gosden and another v Halliwell Landau and another [2021] EWHC 159 (Comm)

This claim addressed the question, of when the date for assessment of damages in cases of negligence should be determined and shows that when appropriate the Courts will depart from the default position.


Legal updates

Assessing the scope of employers liability – Chell v Tarmac

These were the opening remarks of Mr Justice Martin Spencer when handing down his Judgment in the recent case of Andrew Chell v Tarmac Cement and Lime Limited [2020] EWHC 2613, the latest in a series of appeals dealing with the scope of vicarious liability.


Legal updates

Non-payment of insurance premiums during the Coronavirus pandemic

The forced closure of many businesses as a result of the Coronavirus pandemic has had a huge impact on the nation’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Recent reports from the Office for National Statistics state that the economy was 25% smaller in April than it was in February this year.


Legal updates

Reinstatement for property damage losses – when does it apply?

The Court of Appeal has recently considered the correct test for measuring the indemnity for property damage losses and has provided useful guidance on whether an insured needs to intend to reinstate the property to its pre-loss condition.


The content on this page is provided for the purposes of general interest and information. It contains only brief summaries of aspects of the subject matter and does not provide comprehensive statements of the law. It does not constitute legal advice and does not provide a substitute for it.

Mailing list sign up

Select which mailings you would like to receive from us.

Sign up