Who's to blame if a passenger opens a car door and causes damage?

Strider590

sheramber wrote: »

Who said the car was parked facing on coming traffic.

`It could be the rear seat passenger, sitting behind the driver, that opens the door into the road..

Being pedantic doesn't help....... And your statement doesn't make what I said any less true.

unholyangel

Warwick_Hunt wrote: »

A door opened onto a moving vehicle is enough.

No, its not. It would depend entirely on the facts of each case as I stated above.

For example there are plenty of roads where a car can be parked at both sides with doors open and still leave plenty of room for cars to pass freely in both directions.

Plus, you're supposed to pass other vehicles leaving plenty of room where possible for exactly that reason - in case they open the car door.

Warwick_Hunt

unholyangel wrote: »

No, its not. It would depend entirely on the facts of each case as I stated above.

For example there are plenty of roads where a car can be parked at both sides with doors open and still leave plenty of room for cars to pass freely in both directions.

Plus, you're supposed to pass other vehicles leaving plenty of room where possible for exactly that reason - in case they open the car door.

It is, if it causes an accident.

unholyangel

Warwick_Hunt wrote: »

It is, if it causes an accident.

As above - it depends on circumstances. If the road was sufficiently wide enough, the door was opened 5-10 seconds before the car passed and the passing car failed to leave sufficient room which then resulted in an accident in which they were injured, its unlikely the person who opened the door of the parked car would be found guilty of the criminal offence.

Alternatively, if it was a narrow road and they flung open the door at the point the front of the passing car was alongside the rear of the parked car and it led to someone in the passing car to be injured, then they may very well be found guilty of a criminal offence.

ETA: I've heard of plenty of pedestrians & cyclists being injured in this way and cars being damaged by people opening car doors without looking - I've yet to hear of one where the car driver was injured by it though!

Warwick_Hunt

unholyangel wrote: »

As above - it depends on circumstances. If the road was sufficiently wide enough, the door was opened 5-10 seconds before the car passed and the passing car failed to leave sufficient room which then resulted in an accident in which they were injured, its unlikely the person who opened the door of the parked car would be found guilty of the criminal offence.

Alternatively, if it was a narrow road and they flung open the door at the point the front of the passing car was alongside the rear of the parked car and it led to someone in the passing car to be injured, then they may very well be found guilty of a criminal offence.

ETA: I've heard of plenty of pedestrians & cyclists being injured in this way and cars being damaged by people opening car doors without looking - I've yet to hear of one where the car driver was injured by it though!

The driver doesn't need to be injured, read the legislation.

unholyangel

Warwick_Hunt wrote: »

The driver doesn't need to be injured, read the legislation.

I have read the legislation - I even quoted it. Here it is again:

No person shall open, or cause or permit to be opened, any door of a vehicle on a road so as to injure or endanger any person.

Again, no criminal liability arises if the only thing "endangered" is a vehicle. It has to pose risk to a person. If you think it creates a criminal liability regardless of circumstance then by all means, quote some cases to back your point up. But I know you'll be hard pushed to find even one that involves a passing car rather than pedestrian or cyclist.

Warwick_Hunt

unholyangel wrote: »

I have read the legislation - I even quoted it. Here it is again:

No person shall open, or cause or permit to be opened, any door of a vehicle on a road so as to injure or endanger any person.


Again, no criminal liability arises if the only thing "endangered" is a vehicle. It has to pose risk to a person. If you think it creates a criminal liability regardless of circumstance then by all means, quote some cases to back your point up. But I know you'll be hard pushed to find even one that involves a passing car rather than pedestrian or cyclist.

No the driver of that vehicle is endangered. Unless you are claiming going round crashing is a safe thing to do.