SINGAPORE: A passenger in a Grab car sued the driver over injuries he sustained in an accident in 2021, when the driver ran a red light and hit another vehicle.
However, during the first stage of the trial determining liability, the judge found that the passenger bore 20 per cent of the fault for his injuries because he failed to wear a seat belt, "the most basic of precautions to ensure his own safety on the road".
District Judge Tay Jingxi referred to a case from as early as 1975, which stated that a "prudent man" should always wear a seat belt "if he is wise".
The court judgment was made available over the weekend. The passenger, Mr Baek Jongwoo, filed an appeal against the finding that he was 20 per cent liable.
THE CASE
Mr Baek was in the rear passenger seat of Mr John Susaretnam's car at around 8pm on May 12, 2021.
Mr John drove through a red light and collided with another vehicle at the junction along Anson Road and Maxwell Road.
Mr Baek suffered unspecified injuries in the accident and sued Mr John, seeking a finding that he bore no contributory negligence, while the driver was 100 per cent liable for the accident and injuries.
Mr Baek, who was represented by lawyer Winston Low from Winston Low and Partners, said in his affidavit that Mr John drove off before giving him an opportunity to fasten his seatbelt.
He wrote that it took less than a minute for Mr John to go from the pick-up location to the point of the collision, which was not enough time for him to fasten his seatbelt.
He also wrote that he was carrying a backpack and an iPad and was about to buckle the belt when the collision occurred.
During the trial, Mr Baek testified that he greeted Mr John after boarding his car and placed his belongings to one side. He said that he might also have been checking his phone to see the licence plate number of Mr John's vehicle.
He added that 10 to 20 seconds elapsed from the time he entered the car to the time he tried to put on his seat belt.
When cross-examined about the discrepancy between the time he stated at trial and the time he stated in his affidavit, Mr Baek stuck to the time of 10 to 20 seconds.
The judge said that Mr Baek ultimately provided "little, if any, further explanation" as to why a period of 20 seconds was not enough for him to fasten his seat belt.
Mr John was defended by Mr Richard Tan Seng Chew and Ms Cynthiya C Charles Christy from law firm Tan Chin Hoe & Co.
He admitted that he had driven through the red light but was unable to recall whether he had reminded Mr Baek to fasten his seat belt or whether he had even done so.
BREACHES BY DRIVER
The court noted that it was beyond dispute that Mr John, as a professional Grabcar driver, owed his passengers a duty of care to drive in a manner that would not expose them to harm.
However, the judge was unable to find that Mr John was driving at a "fast speed" or above the limit as asserted by Mr Baek based on the evidence, including video footage.
Nonetheless, she found that Mr John had breached his duty of care to Mr Baek by:
- Failing to heed the red traffic light signal
- Failing to give way to the other vehicle that had the right of way
- Failing to avoid the collision and driving into the front passenger side of the other vehicle
Judge Tay then turned to the question of whether Mr Baek should bear some responsibility for his injuries.
She noted that his "sole justification" for not wearing a seat belt was his claim that he did not have enough time to do so.
However, she found that the amount of time he purportedly had to fasten the seat belt was irrelevant to the analysis.
"On a proper reading of the relevant statutory provisions, Mr Baek's obligation to fasten his seat belt as a passenger arose before Mr John's car moved off," she said.
"His omission to fasten his seatbelt at that point amounted to contributory negligence because he had at that point already failed to take reasonable care for his own safety."
THE SEAT BELT RULE
The judge referred to a rule in the Road Traffic (Motor Vehicles, Wearing of Seat Belts) Rules 2011, which states that the driver and every passenger of a motor vehicle shall wear a seat belt or lap belt, to provide restraint for the body of the wearer in the event of an accident.
She noted that the scope of this rule is not limited to moving vehicles, since being on the road by itself is an "inherently dangerous activity" because a person may not act carelessly on the road, but other road users may.
"A prudent adult passenger (such as Mr Baek) ought reasonably to foresee such risks," Judge Tay said. "In my judgment, he must therefore fasten his seat belt upon entering a vehicle and ensure that he has done so before the vehicle moves off. Only then can such a passenger fulfil the duty he owes to himself to take reasonable care for his own safety on the road."
