Chris Boardman calls for presumed liability law to help get more people commuting by bike

“We need legislation that properly values people travelling actively,” says champion cyclist turned campaigner

Mon, May 25, 2020 14:33

Chris Boardman has urged the government to introduce a system of presumed liability, similar to that operating across most of Europe, to help get more people commuting by bike once lockdown ends.

“We need legislation that properly values people travelling actively,” the former world and Olympic champion, who is now Greater Manchester’s cycling and walking commissioner as well as policy advisor to British Cycling, told Telegraph.co.uk.

He pointed out that the United Kingdom was one of only five European countries – the others are Cyprus, Ireland, Malta and Romania – not to have such a system in force.

“Nearly all other countries have done this, to put a duty of care in their legislation for everyone on the roads to look after a more vulnerable road user.”

Sometimes incorrectly referred to as “strict liability,” the concept of presumed liability establishes a clear hierarchy of road users in civil (not criminal) cases and is aimed at encouraging mutual respect between them, particularly at locations such as junctions.

Where such a system is in place, when there is a road traffic collision, the less vulnerable road user is considered to be liable, unless they can establish that the other party was at fault.

For example, the driver of a motor vehicle would automatically be held liable in an incident involving a cyclist, while a bike rider would be in a case where a pedestrian is injured.

Boardman said that adopting such a system here would help encourage people who might be apprehensive about riding a bike in traffic.

And while presumed liability doesn’t extend to the criminal law and would not apply for example in dangerous or careless driving cases, Boardman pointed out that “Using a car is the best way to commit a crime because the penalties are so light relative to the damage caused.”

Another reason for the need for a presumed liability system, he said, was because while the government wants people to avoid public transport, one in four households around the country rising to a third in cities such as Manchester do not have access to a car.

He asked: “If I don’t create an option other than public transport to get to work, is the Government saying that you can’t have access to work because you haven’t got a car?

“If you don’t create an option, you are penalising the poorest third of households.”

He also underlined that temporary infrastructure being introduced by councils across the country had an important role to play, through reallocating roadspace to people on foot or on bikes.

“You can do that immediately with planters, paint and cones. You can put them in as an emergency measure and if they are wrong, then you can take them away and do something different.

“It is the most effective form of consultation: people can try before they buy,” he added.

In 2015, following a trip to Denmark with then cycling minister Robert Goodwill, Boardman featured in this video from British Cycling in which he outlined three cycling lessons the UK could learn from Denmark – the first of those being the introduction of presumed liability.

> Video: Chris Boardman's 3 cycling lessons UK can take from Denmark

chris boardman

Presumed liability

UK lockdown

Simon MacMichael

Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.

Add new comment

40 comments

hawkinspeter replied to Rich_cb | 4 years ago

1 like

Rich_cb wrote:

I don't think it's an easy change. It fundementally changes the principles underpinning civil justice. That's a monumental change to make. Relative to increasing the sentences for driving offences it's incredibly difficult. With the exception of Romania all the other countries listed have English Common Law as the basis of their legal systems indicating that it might not be as easy to impose such a change under Common Law as it is in countries operating Civil Law.

If we can't make such a simple change to law (which would only take effect when there is no other evidence in a case) then I despair on how the govt is going to make changes to laws for Brexit. Either you're talking up the difficulty of presumed liability or we'll never Get Brexit Done.

Rich_cb replied to hawkinspeter | 4 years ago

1 like

I'm by no means a legal expert but from what I understand in order to modify common law you have to first codify it.

It is that codification step that takes a huge amount of effort.

Huge swathes of our law have never been codified, the laws on murder being the highest profile example.

In countries that operate civil law all of their law is codified by default.

With Brexit, any legal work required to allow parliament to change laws would have been done when we joined and signed various treaties, they can therefore be undone relatively simply.