0370 270 6000

Purdue v Devon Fire, Rescue Service (Court of Appeal)

15 October 2002
The issues

Emergency Services – fire engines – collisions – road traffic – duty to look.

The facts

A fire engine owned by the Defendant was travelling to an emergency along a long stretch of dual carriageway. It approached a junction, where a car was waiting to turn right across its path. As it approached, the light shown to the fire engine turned red and the light showing to the driver of the vehicle turned green. The driver pulled away and the fire engine and the car collided. At first instance, the County found the Fire Brigade liable on the basis that the fire engine had not been sounding wailers and that it had acted negligently in proceeding through the red light. There was no finding of contributory negligence. The Defendant appealed.

The decision

1. The facts in this case were very different to the facts in Griffin -v- Mersey Regional Ambulance Service NHS Trust. Each such case was to be determined upon its own facts.

2. A driver had a duty to take reasonable care to avoid a collision with any vehicle that crossed a red signal.

3. The Highway Code particularly obliged drivers to look and listen for emergency vehicles.

4. It was reasonable to expect that the Claimant would have looked to his right whilst he was stationary. It was not easy to say whether that expectation amounted to a duty. A properly observant driver however would have seen the fire engine coming. A finding of 20% contributory negligence would be made against the driver. Appeal allowed.

For further information on this case please contact Marie Macfarlane at mariemacfarlane@veitchpenny.co.uk.

Focus on...

Legal updates

Court of Appeal confirms exclusive English jurisdiction clause in excess liability policies in Canadian pipeline dispute

On 10 June 2022 the Court of Appeal upheld an anti-suit injunction granted in favour of insurers by Mr Justice Jacobs in September 2021 restraining proceedings from being brought in Canada and enforcing the exclusive English jurisdiction clause in excess liability policies.

View

Blogs

Payment Fraud landscape shaped by technology in 2021

Payment systems across Europe are under increased pressure to mitigate fraud risks and defend against persistent attacks from enablers using ever more sophisticated and malicious viruses and malware.

View

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.

View

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.

View

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