The High Court has cut a €27,500 award for a cyclist who was injured when his bike hit a newly repaired speed ramp outside his home to €9,137.
Mark Taylor (39) fell off his bicycle when he claimed he hit the ramp while turning into his home at Mangerton Road, Drimnagh, Dublin, as he was cycling home in the dark at around 6pm on December 14th, 2015.
He further claimed the ramp was not properly marked or illuminated to highlight its existence to drivers and cyclists, thus creating a trap or hazard.
He claimed his front wheel went from under him when he hit the ramp, adding he went over the handlebars, hitting his chin on the road and putting his arms out to break his fall.
He suffered bruising to his chin and ribs and a fracture to his wrist which was in a cast for eight weeks, the court heard.
He sued SIAC Construction Ltd, which installed the ramps, and Dublin City Council, as the road authority. SIAC had indemnified the council and was representing both parties in the case, the court heard.
Mr Taylor, represented by Andrew Walker SC, with Conor Kearney BL, argued the ramp could have been illuminated with a cone with a light on it.
It was also claimed that a temporary emulsion paint put on the ramp was inadequate warning for road users in the dark. There was a failure to comply with guidelines on ramp construction, it was claimed.
The defendants, represented by Richard Lyons SC, with Eamon Marray BL, denied liability and argued that the white emulsion paint had been applied to the ramp on a temporary basis while the bitumen in the newly repaired ramp was given time to oxidise before more permanent thermoplastic paint was applied.
The duty was to take reasonable care for the road user where there was a foreseeable danger and the use of the emulsion paint temporarily was reasonable, it was argued.
Appeal
The Circuit Court had awarded Mr Taylor €27,500 and the defendants appealed to the High Court.
Cutting that award to €9,137, Mr Justice Michael O'Higgins found Mr Taylor two thirds liable for the accident and the defendants one third liable.
He was satisfied that the omission of illuminated paint for the period between when the ramp was laid and when the thermoplastic paint was applied was a limited factor in the accident.
He accepted Mr Taylor had given a reasonably truthful account of what happened and was caught unaware by the ramp, which was a causative factor in his fall.
However, the most salient point was that Mr Taylor would have routinely passed this ramp outside his home for the previous 12 months before it was repaired, he said.
Mr Taylor also had illumination from his bike light and the street lamp as well as some degree of light from a neighbouring house and his own home.
This all meant he ought to have been careful on a road with not just this ramp but a number of them, he said. This should have prompted him to slow down or at any rate tighten his grip on the handlebars as he was about to turn, he added.
In the circumstances, he found Mr Taylor must bear "significant responsibility" for the accident.
Costs in the case will be dealt with at a later stage.
