Helmet Use and Liability in Bicycle Accidents: Examining the Role of Contributory Negligence in Cycling Injuries

Given the beautiful trails and nature Alberta has to offer, it is unsurprising that cycling is becoming an increasingly popular hobby in the province. As drivers and cyclists alike learn and adjust to sharing the road, understanding the legal rules and obligations surrounding cycling is crucial to safe travel. Recent Statistics Canada Research concludes that roughly one-third of cycling fatalities occurred in a situation where road safety laws were not followed. Beyond existing legal requirements, cyclists are also advised to take additional safety measures, such as wearing a helmet. Failing to follow these simple precautions could have legal implications if a cyclist is injured in an accident with a driver. Therefore, it is important for a cyclist to be aware of their rights and understand how lapses in safety precautions may affect them.

How is Liability Determined in a Cycling Accident?

In a typical lawsuit, it is the responsibility of the injured party to prove that the individual responsible for the injury caused the harm. However, in accidents involving a car and a cyclist, the reverse is true. The driver of the vehicle is assumed to have acted in a negligent manner unless they can prove that the damage incurred was caused by the cyclist.

Some believe that cyclists are subject to different laws than drivers, but bicycles are actually classified as “vehicles” under the Alberta Traffic Safety Act. This classification means that cyclists must follow the same rules as cars, such as avoiding distracted or negligent cycling. In this case, negligence is the failure to take proper care and attention to the safety of oneself and others. Although failure to wear a helmet does not violate the Traffic Safety Act unless the individual in question is under 18 years old, this failure could be considered negligent when determining liability between a cyclist and a driver. In such cases, the cyclist may be considered “contributorily negligent” as regards the accident and the cyclist’s injuries, which would result in a reduction to the cyclist’s damages, as per the Contributory Negligence Act.

What is Contributory Negligence?

In Bow Valley Husky Ltd. v. Saint John Shipbuilding, the Supreme Court of Canada discussed what a defendant must accomplish to prove a plaintiff was contributorily negligent:  “…all that is necessary to establish such a defence is to prove to the satisfaction of the jury that the injured party did not in his own interest take reasonable care of himself and contributed, by this want of care, to his own injury. For when contributory negligence is set up as a shield against the obligation to satisfy the whole of the plaintiff’s claim, the principle involved is that, where a man is part author of his own injury, he cannot call on the other party to compensate him in full”.

So, what does that mean in the context of cycling accidents? Essentially, if a cyclist was behaving unsafely prior to an accident, and if this behaviour contributed in some way to the accident and their injuries, the compensation the cyclist may have otherwise received for the accident is reduced because they are viewed as partly responsible. In instances such as these, the amount of compensation awarded is adjusted based on a determined percentage of fault. if a cyclist would have been awarded $100,000 in damages after being hit by a motor vehicle, but it was determined that their failure to wear a helmet was responsible for 25% of their injuries, the cyclist would instead receive $75,000 in damages.

There are a variety of cyclist actions or omissions that may be viewed as contributorily negligent. These actions and omissions include:

• not wearing a helmet;
• the use of headphones;
• not obeying traffic signals;
• failure to remain visible to drivers at night (lack of bike lights and/or reflective clothing);
• distracted cycling; and
• impairment by alcohol, cannabis, or other substances.

 

For a defence of contributory negligence to be successful, the driver must prove that the negligent actions taken by the cyclist contributed to the cyclists’ injuries. For example, if the cyclist was not wearing a helmet, the driver must prove that the cyclists’ lack of a helmet was contributed to any injuries caused. If the cyclist’s injuries would have occurred regardless of the use of a helmet, the actions of the driver will still be viewed as the central cause of the accident.  Complex issues such as these are why it is crucial to obtain legal counsel, so that you may fully understand the context of your situation and how best to proceed.

Are there Alternative Ways to receive Compensation?

A cyclist can be partially, or even entirely, found to be at fault for an accident and still receive accident benefits, or ‘Section B benefits,’ to help cover some of their damages. These benefits are sometimes referred to as “no fault” benefits because they are available to all parties regardless of who caused the accident. Section B benefits ensure coverage for any necessary medical treatment or medication, as well as provide a portion of any lost income resulting from the accident. More information on Section B and how to access it can be found here.

Understanding How to Navigate your Bicycle Injury: Hire an Injury Lawyer Today

At KMSC Law, we understand that the last thing you want to be doing after a life-changing accident is navigating the often complex and difficult world of injury law. Getting assistance from an experienced team of lawyers means that you can prioritize rest and recovery, while we prioritize fighting to ensure your livelihood and well being is protected.