差点酿成大祸
登录 | 论坛导航 -> 华新鲜事 -> 房产车市 | 本帖共有 132 楼,当前显示第 103 楼 : 从楼主开始阅读 : 本帖树形列表 : 返回上一页
作者:typhoonzj (等级:4 - 马马虎虎,发帖:5628) 发表:2022-02-19 00:39:46  103楼 
可以洗洗睡了搞半天某人沾沾自喜的结果是完全错的,还说什么直行车只是超速被罚,没有其他责任,那不是断章取义,那是纯扯淡, 正式过程和结果在这里,非常详细,直行车没有超速那么多,是72到84,他没有减速,但不是故意,而是只看到了第一辆右转的车,没看到跟着的taxi,最终被判了35%责任。这个判罚我认为是有根有据。而绝不是什么路权最大说。 https://www.elitigation.sg/gd/s/2021_SGCA_93 We therefore dismissed this appeal. This case certainly does not establish a precedent that the relative liability of straight-moving vehicles with the right of way against turning vehicles has now been raised to 35% without qualification. The appellant’s liability was assessed to be higher than most of the cases he cited simply because that degree of contributory negligence was justified on the facts. 以后跟fqfp辩得先做基本查证,否则连起点都是被误导的
这段判决依据尤其的好,深得我心,我给法官点赞
29The video footages showed two motorcycles from the Taxi’s end of CAW crossing the junction followed by the unknown vehicle on the left of the Taxi. There can be little doubt that the Nissan’s speed, calculated to be about 20.5 metres per second, assuming it was travelling at the lower end of the range of 74 to 87 kmph, was not a speed at which the driver could take reactive action if some other turning vehicle also started to cross the Nissan’s path.
[本文发送自华新手机Wap版]
欢迎来到华新中文网,踊跃发帖是支持我们的最好方法!原文 / 传统版 / WAP版只看此人从这里展开收起列表

本帖共有 132 楼,当前显示第 103 楼,本文还有 N-1 层楼,要不你试试看:点击此处阅读更多 >>



请登录后回复:帐号   密码