In Brief
- A reasonable person, when boarding a bus, would foresee that the bus might move away from the kerb as soon as the doors are closed, even if some boarding passengers have not yet found their seat.
- A reasonable person, standing on a bus, would take the precaution of holding onto an available handrail.
Facts
The decision in
Hidalgo v Allianz Australia Insurance Limited [2024] NSWPIC 356 was published by the Personal Injury Commission on 19 July 2024.
The Claimant boarded an STA bus. She was carrying a trolley case with an extended handle.
CCTV demonstrated that the Claimant moved down the aisle and placed her trolley in the luggage rack. The handle of the trolley, however, failed to retract. She used both hands to try and push the handle into its retracted position.
In the meantime, the doors of the bus had closed. The driver started to move the bus forward. Within a few seconds, however, the driver applied the brakes to stop the bus at a red traffic light.
The sudden braking of the bus caused the Claimant to fall forward. She landed heavily on the floor of the bus and injured her left shoulder and neck.
The Insurer alleged that the Claimant was partially responsible for her accident. An allegation of 25% contributory negligence was affirmed following Internal Review.
The Claimant sought a Miscellaneous Assessment of the Insurer’s determination.
The Member’s Decision
The Member agreed with the Insurer that the Claimant was partially at fault for the following reasons:
- A reasonable person in the Claimant’s position should be aware, when boarding a bus, that the bus may move forward in motion once all passengers are onboard and the doors of the bus are closed.
- A reasonable person in the Claimant’s position should be aware that the bus may move forward even where some boarding passengers have not yet taken a seat.
- If, for example, there are no seats available, a person boarding a bus, such as the Claimant, must stand and hold onto one of the available handrails.
- A reasonable person in the Claimant’s position would not stand in a moving bus without taking the precaution of holding onto a handrail.
In apportioning responsibility, the Member found the bus driver 90% responsible and the Claimant 10% responsible.
The Member therefore assessed contributory negligence at 10%.
Key Learnings
The decision in Hidalgo provides a useful summary of the factors at play in assessing contributory negligence when a passenger in a bus fails to hold onto a handrail.
The decision confirms that a reasonable bus passenger would understand that the bus might start moving as soon as the doors are closed and be vigilant in securing themselves by holding onto a handrail.
If you have a query relating to any of the information in this case note, or would like to discuss a similar matter of your own, please don’t hesitate to get in touch with CTP Insurance Principal, Peter Hunt, today.
Additional McCabes Resources