Fatal Accident Claim Compensation: $245K Payout in Pedestrian Car Accident – Case Study and Guide

How much compensation for a fatal accident claim involving pedestrian injuries in Western Australia? $169,500.26 was awarded to the Partner of the Deceased for the fatal injuries sustained by the Deceased Pedestrian, including severe trauma leading to death. Here is everything you need to know about the fatal injury dependency claim.

Introduction to the Fatal Accident Dependency Claim

This case study examines the landmark decision [2018] WADC 38, a pivotal personal injury case in Western Australia. The case is significant for exploring key legal issues in fatal motor vehicle accident claims involving pedestrians, including negligence, contributory negligence, and the assessment of damages in fatal accidents.

Background to the fatal accident compensation claim

This case involves a fatal accident claim arising from a motor vehicle accident involving a pedestrian.

The plaintiff, the Partner of the Deceased, tragically lost her partner, the Deceased Pedestrian, who died at the age of 41 after being struck by a motor vehicle driven by the defendant, the Driver, on 20 May. At the time of the fatal car accident, the Deceased Pedestrian and the Partner of the Deceased had two dependent children, aged 10 and 5. The family’s sole income source was Centrelink allowances.

How did the fatal car accident happen?

On the evening of May 20th, at approximately 10:00 pm, the Deceased Pedestrian was walking his dog along Preston Point Road in Bicton, Western Australia. The Driver, operating a Holden Commodore sedan eastbound on the same road, hit the Deceased Pedestrian as he crossed the road diagonally. The Driver was traveling at 55 km/h, which was 5 km/h over the 50 km/h speed limit. The court found that this excess speed deprived the Driver of the necessary time to avoid the collision.

While there were no eyewitnesses to the collision, making the case reliant on circumstantial evidence, expert testimony on factors such as visibility, road conditions, and reaction times played a crucial role in the court’s findings.

Key Issues Disputed in the Fatal Accident Compensation Claim

Negligence

The central question was whether the Driver failed to maintain a proper lookout and drive with due care and attention, ultimately causing the fatal accident. The court found that the Driver was exceeding the speed limit and should have seen the Deceased Pedestrian from a distance that would have allowed her to avoid the collision.

The court highlighted that the streetlight positioned near the point of impact should have made the pedestrian visible much earlier, contradicting the Driver’s claims that the road’s incline and the car’s bonnet obstructed her view.

Contributory Negligence

The court examined whether the Deceased Pedestrian contributed to the accident by failing to take appropriate care for his own safety, particularly in light of his dark clothing and the presence of alcohol in his system. The Deceased Pedestrian had a blood alcohol content of 0.1% at the time of the accident.

Although the defense argued that the alcohol level indicated impaired judgment, the court found insufficient evidence to establish that the Deceased Pedestrian was intoxicated to the extent that his capacity to exercise reasonable care was impaired. The court noted that no expert physiological evidence was provided to confirm that the blood alcohol level affected the pedestrian’s actions.

Despite this, the court found that the Deceased Pedestrian’s back was turned to traffic, and he failed to check for oncoming vehicles. This failure to ensure his own safety contributed to the accident, leading to the contributory negligence finding.

Quantum of Damages

Another key issue was determining the appropriate amount of compensation for the loss of dependency and services provided by the Deceased Pedestrian to his family. The court carefully considered the family’s reliance on Centrelink allowances and the value of gratuitous services the Deceased Pedestrian provided to his family, which contributed to the final compensation amount.

Key Evidence in the Fatal Car Accident Dependency Claim

Medical and Alcohol Evidence

Given the fatal nature of the Deceased Pedestrian’s injuries, the case did not heavily rely on medical evidence. However, the court considered:

• The Deceased Pedestrian’s blood alcohol content, which was 0.1% at the time of the accident. The court did not find this level sufficient to prove intoxication.
• Expert testimony provided by Dr. Corben regarding the effects of alcohol on pedestrian behavior, noting that while pedestrians with similar blood alcohol levels often display riskier behavior, this was not sufficient to establish intoxication in this case.

Expert Testimony on Traffic Safety and Perception Reaction Time (PRT)

The Road Safety Consultant, a traffic safety consultant, provided crucial expert testimony on perception reaction times (PRT) and the likelihood of a fatal outcome based on the vehicle’s speed. His evidence included detailed analysis and tables showing the stopping distances of a vehicle at various speeds and the associated PRT.

Dr. Corben opined that the Driver’s PRT should have been around 1.5 seconds, given that she was not distracted or impaired, and the road conditions were clear. This time frame would have allowed her to stop the vehicle in time. The court ultimately favored this analysis over alternative suggestions of longer reaction times.

Expert Testimony on Lighting and Visibility

The Visibility Expert, a professional mechanical engineer, presented evidence on the lighting conditions at the accident scene and the visibility of pedestrians under those conditions. He conducted a detailed analysis using professional photographs taken at night, which simulated the conditions on the night of the accident.

The court heavily relied on this testimony, which demonstrated that under the streetlight near the point of impact, the Deceased Pedestrian should have been visible from 40 to 60 meters away. The court rejected the Driver’s argument that the slight incline in the road obstructed her view, noting that the photographic evidence proved the road was relatively flat and well-lit in the critical area.

Photographic and Police Evidence

Photographic Evidence

The police provided photographic evidence from the scene, showing the location of fluid and debris on the roadway, which indicated where the impact likely occurred. These photographs also illustrated the lighting conditions and the physical environment at the time of the accident, reinforcing the expert testimony on visibility.

The debris, including a broken Corona beer bottle, suggested that the point of impact occurred near the boundary between 287 and 291 Preston Point Road, contrary to the Driver’s claim that it happened further along the road.

Police Investigation Records

The police report included observations about the accident scene, the likely point of impact, and the positions of the vehicle and the Deceased Pedestrian after the collision. This evidence was critical in piecing together the sequence of events leading up to the fatal accident.

Evidence of Financial and Non-Financial Dependencies

Financial Dependency on Centrelink Allowances

The court considered the financial situation of the family, specifically that the only form of income for the Deceased Pedestrian, the Partner of the Deceased, and their two children was Centrelink allowances. This was critical in assessing the loss of financial support to the dependents following the Deceased Pedestrian’s death.

Gratuitous Services Provided by the Deceased Pedestrian

Evidence was presented regarding the non-financial contributions that the Deceased Pedestrian made to his family, often referred to as “gratuitous services.” These services, including childcare and household maintenance, were assigned an economic value in the assessment of damages.

Assessment of the Children’s Future Needs

The court considered the future needs of the two dependent children, aged 10 and 5 at the time of the Deceased Pedestrian’s death, including their upbringing, education, and overall financial support.

Life Expectancy and Future Loss Calculations

The court used actuarial tables to estimate the Deceased Pedestrian’s life expectancy and the potential duration of his support to his dependents, which was a key factor in determining future financial losses.

Findings by the District Court of Western Australia

Negligence

The court found the Driver negligent for failing to maintain a proper lookout. Judge Goetze DCJ emphasized that the Driver should have seen the Deceased Pedestrian in time to avoid the collision, stating:

“the Driver should have seen the Deceased Pedestrian if she had been keeping a proper lookout and she should have seen him from a distance which would have enabled her to bring her motor vehicle to a halt before the point of impact or if after impact, at least so that impact occurred at a greatly reduced speed.”

Contributory Negligence

The court also found that the Deceased Pedestrian was negligent in contributing to his own death. Judge Goetze DCJ remarked:

“the Deceased Pedestrian had a duty of self-preservation to check and make sure it was safe for him to cross the roadway. He was wearing dark clothing. He did not heed the presence of the Driver in her motor vehicle with its traffic lights on low beam or hear the engine of her car because if he had, then he would either have waited on the roadside for her to pass, or he would have crossed the roadway with sufficient time and haste to ensure his safe passage.”

The court apportioned liability, assigning two-thirds of the responsibility to the Driver and one-third to Deceased Pedestrian.

Fatal Accident Compensation Amount

The District Court of Western Australia awarded the following damages:

The Partner of the Deceased (First plaintiff)

• • • Past loss of financial support: $15,000
  • Future loss of financial support: $90,000
  • Past loss of services: $39,250.40
  • Future loss of services: $110,000
  • Total before apportionment: $254,250.40
  • Final award (after 1/3 reduction): $169,500.26

The Elder Dependent Child (First Second-named plaintiff)

• • • Future loss of dependency: $6,084.65
    • Final award (after 1/3 reduction): $4,056.43

The Younger Dependent Child (Second Second-named plaintiff)

• • Future loss of dependency: $15,084.95
  • Final award (after 1/3 reduction): $10,056.63

Funeral Expenses

• • Amount awarded: $8,493.65
  • Final award (after 1/3 reduction): $5,662.43

Discount Rate for Future Economic Loss

• • The court applied a discount rate of 6% for future economic loss, as per the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1941 (WA).

Criminal Injuries Compensation

The court considered the Deceased Pedestrian’s trust fund from a previous criminal injuries compensation claim in the damages calculation. The balance of $9,632.66 was paid to the Partner of the Deceased after deducting funeral expenses. The court determined that this accelerated payment had minimal impact on the overall compensation and did not significantly affect the award.

Legal Principles Applied

Standard of Care

The court reaffirmed the principle that drivers must exercise reasonable care to avoid foreseeable risks to pedestrians, even when the pedestrians themselves may be negligent.

Contributory Negligence

Following the precedent set in Podrebersek v Australian Iron & Steel Pty Ltd (1985), the court considered the comparative culpability of both parties in causing the damage.

Assessment of Damages

In accordance with the Fatal Accidents Act 1959 (WA), the court applied the following principles:

• Loss of Dependency: Calculated based on the Deceased Pedestrian’s income and the family’s reliance on social security benefits.
• Loss of Gratuitous Services: Considered the value of services the Deceased Pedestrian would have provided to his family.
• Impact of Social Security Benefits: The court assessed how these benefits influenced the damages awarded.

Implications and Significance

Importance of Driver Vigilance

This case reinforces the high duty of care that drivers owe to pedestrians, particularly in urban areas where pedestrians are more likely to be present. Even in cases where pedestrians may exhibit negligent behavior, drivers are expected to anticipate and avoid potential accidents.

Assessment of Damages

The case provides a detailed framework for assessing damages in fatal accident claims, particularly in situations involving low-income families reliant on social security benefits. The court’s approach to calculating economic losses offers valuable insights for personal injury lawyers.

Relevance to Future Cases

The decision in the  Partner of the Deceased v the Driver as a crucial reference for similar pedestrian accident claims, particularly those involving fatalities or low-income families. It demonstrates the court’s meticulous approach to assessing liability and damages, highlighting the importance of maintaining a proper lookout while driving.

Relevance to Future Cases

The decision in the Partner of the Deceased v the Driver serves as a crucial reference for similar pedestrian accident claims, particularly those involving fatalities or low-income families. It demonstrates the court’s meticulous approach to assessing liability and damages, highlighting the importance of maintaining a proper lookout while driving.

Guide for Dependents in Fatal Motor Vehicle Accident Claims

Losing a loved one in a motor vehicle accident is devastating, and it’s important to understand your rights and how to avoid common disputes in your claim.

1. Get a Personal Injury Lawyer Early

One of the most important steps you can take is to get a personal injury lawyer with experience in motor vehicle accident injuries involved as soon as possible. A lawyer can guide you through the process and help protect your rights.

2. Understanding Negligence

Negligence is often the main issue in these cases. The driver may be found negligent if they did not drive carefully. To avoid disputes, it’s crucial to gather evidence quickly, such as witness statements or traffic camera footage, showing that the driver did not take proper care.

3. Contributory Negligence

Sometimes, the person who died may also be considered partly at fault, known as contributory negligence. For example, if the person was not paying attention while crossing the road, it could reduce the compensation. Your lawyer will help address this issue by showing that the driver was more at fault.

4. Assessment of Damages

The amount of compensation depends on factors like lost income and services provided by the deceased. A lawyer will ensure that all aspects of your loss are considered, so you receive the full compensation you deserve.

5. Act Fast

Acting quickly is key to avoiding disputes. Delays can make it harder to gather evidence and may affect the outcome of your claim.

In summary, involving a personal injury lawyer with expertise in motor vehicle accident injuries right away is crucial to avoid common disputes in fatal accident claims. They will help ensure that negligence and contributory negligence issues are properly handled, and that you receive the maximum compensation for your loss.

Make a compensation claim for fatal injuries? Contact Foyle Legal

We understand how overwhelming it can be to navigate the legal process of a personal injury claim. At Foyle Legal, we are experts in fatal injury compensation claims, helping families like yours receive the compensation they deserve.

Our team of workers compensation and personal injury lawyers has extensive experience in handling fatal car accident claims and work accident fatalities. We’ve successfully represented family members who have lost a loved one in a fatal accident, guiding them through complex issues like negligence, contributory negligence, and the assessment of damages.

If your loved one was involved in a fatal road accident or suffered a wrongful death due to someone else’s fault, you may be eligible to claim compensation. We deal with these issues daily, ensuring that compensation is available to dependents. Our expertise helps families maximise compensation by addressing all aspects of the injury claim.

Whether the driver who caused the accident was at fault, or there are complex factors like psychiatric injury or contributory negligence, our accident claim experts are here to help. Working with a law firm you can trust to provide sound legal advice and representation in fatal car accident claims, is critical to the success of your dependency claim.

If you’re unsure about your rights or whether you may be entitled to claim, we can assist you in understanding your options. We help family members claim the compensation for loss that they are entitled to, guiding them through each step of the legal claim process.

Make a fatal injury claim? Contact Foyle Legal today. We are committed to helping you and your family receive compensation for your loss. Contact us to discuss how we can assist you in seeking compensation after a fatal accident. It’s No Win, No Fee!

Conclusion & Current Relevance

The [2018] WADC 38 case highlights the stringent standard of care expected from drivers and the complexities involved in fatal accident claims. This case serves as a critical reference for car accident lawyers and compensation lawyers, especially in dealing with pedestrian accidents that result in fatalities.

The decision provides a framework for claim lawyers to navigate issues like negligence, contributory negligence, and the calculation of damages. For family members who need to make a claim for compensation after losing a loved one, understanding these legal principles is crucial.

In particular, the case underscores how compensation is paid to dependents and the importance of ensuring all losses are accounted for. It also offers guidance on how compensation to relatives can be affected by factors such as social security benefits and the pedestrian’s actions leading up to the accident.

For those able to claim compensation due to a fatal car accident, it’s essential to work with experts in fatal accident claims who understand the intricacies of compensation law. At Foyle Legal, our expert personal injury lawyers are well-versed in these matters, helping clients lodge a claim and secure the compensation available to them.

Whether you or a family member witnessed the accident or are seeking to determine fault in the accident, our fatal accident compensation lawyers are here to help you navigate the legal process. We assist clients in filling out the necessary claim forms and ensure that all avenues for compensation are explored.

By partnering with one of our personal injury lawyers, you may be able to achieve the best possible outcome for your claim for compensation.

Sources and Reference:

[2018] WADC 38 Case Decision: https://ecourts.justice.wa.gov.au/eCourtsPortal/Decisions/ViewDecision/0139c26f-047f-f61e-4825-8257003165ce

Government of Western Australia – Fatal Accident Claims: https://www.wa.gov.au/system/files/2021-03/LRC-Project-066-Project-Summary.pdf