Payout for yoga teacher hit by cyclist as she checked phone
A YOGA teacher who stepped into the road while looking at her mobile phone has won damages from the cyclist who struck her.
A judge ruled that even though Gemma Brushett, 28, was distracted when she was hit by Robert Hazeldean, he was still liable, declaring: “Cyclists must be prepared at all times for people to behave in unexpected ways.”
Ms Brushett, from Kent, was knocked out when the pair collided near London Bridge on July 20 2015 as she crossed the road with other pedestrians during the rush hour. She was looking at her phone and only noticed Mr Hazeldean at the last moment.
She “panicked” and tried to dodge back to a traffic island, but the cyclist – travelling at 10 to 15mph – swerved in the same direction and hit her.
Mr Hazeldean had come through a green traffic light, and had sounded a loud air horn attached to his roadbike, as well as shouting, swerving and braking in a bid to avoid the pedestrian.
Ms Brushett’s lawyers told the judge that she could not remember anything about the crash due to “post traumatic amnesia”. She subsequently launched a bid for compensation, blaming Mr Hazeldean, who now lives in southern France, for the accident.
Mr Hazeldean, a graphic designer, was also knocked out by the impact on his commute home. Three other pedestrian witnesses backed him, telling police that Ms Brushett was “not looking where she was going” and that “the cyclist was not at fault”.
Judge Shanti Mauger, sitting at Central London County Court, said the cyclist was “a calm and reasonable road user” who was “courteous and mildmannered”.
However, she went on to find that Ms Brushett deserved a compensation payout, saying Mr Hazeldean “owed a duty to other road users to drive with reasonable care and skill”.
She said: “Even where a motorist or cyclist had the right of way, pedestrians who are established on the road have right of way. Mr Hazeldean did fall below the level to be expected of a reasonably competent cyclist in that he did proceed when the road was not completely clear.”
Making a ruling that both parties were equally responsible, she said Ms Brushett should get half the full value of her claim, which was undisclosed.
The case will return to court at a later date for figures to be fixed on costs and damages.