except that as far as i can see (by looking at the HWC) its not a general right of way. it's right of way in some places and in some particular situations and otherwise all road users should look out for each other.
Crossing the road (pedestrians)
- Thread starter scifisam
- Start date
except that as far as i can see (by looking at the HWC) its not a general right of way. it's right of way in some places and in some particular situations and otherwise all road users should look out for each other.
pogofish
Testicle Hairstyle
Bullshit! - Maybe you should think about sending your licence back then as you clearly have a wee bit more to learn.
The pedestrian right of way is long established in common law - ie by the weight of individual judgements/rulings. The rules in the Highway Code are additional refinements on top of that. The Highways Act 1773 also codified it to a significant degree, establishing the right for all persons to pass and repass on a public highway.
Yes, some of them may well be outright idiots and the law does accept that they can be irresponsable but we accept and have to live with the basic principle every time we use any sort of vehicle.
but does this relate to a general right of way, ie the right to use pavements and roads while on foot? Or is it a right giving priority over other vehicles, ie so once a pedestrian starts crossing a road all other traffic should stop? If it was a right giving priority over other vehicles when crossing roads i would expect that to be emphasised in the highway code, but it isn't.
pogofish
Testicle Hairstyle
The exact quote is:
Which sounds fairly clear?
Of course in 1773, the word highway meant the whole road, as pavements etc largely came later, so niceties like stepping off them or not really didn't make much difference. Everything since is just an attempt to clarify things a bit and largely applies other vehicles, not pedestrians.
Which sounds fairly clear?
Of course in 1773, the word highway meant the whole road, as pavements etc largely came later, so niceties like stepping off them or not really didn't make much difference. Everything since is just an attempt to clarify things a bit and largely applies other vehicles, not pedestrians.
Kid_Eternity
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Lol so some ancient fucking law written before there was cars? Give me a break...
that's far from clear. firstly it does not grant a right, it appears to be an extract from a definition. secondly it doesn't appear to relate to priority between different road/path/highway/pavement users, it just relates to the right to actually use them, ie without being prevented from progressing or charged.
pogofish
Testicle Hairstyle
Yes, there was a time before cars totally took over, you might like to remember that.
Andrew Hertford
Chocolate Jesus
Does the highway code specifically say who has right of way at junctions? I was taught to give way to pedestrians and still do, though over the years I've noticed
drivers doing it much less. You obviously give way to other vehicles at junctions, so why not pedestrians?
It's just a matter of courtesy. Just because you're in a car, it doesn't mean that you need to get to your destination any quicker than a pedestrian.
drivers doing it much less. You obviously give way to other vehicles at junctions, so why not pedestrians?
It's just a matter of courtesy. Just because you're in a car, it doesn't mean that you need to get to your destination any quicker than a pedestrian.
pogofish
Testicle Hairstyle
Rule 170 is probably the most applicable:
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Highwaycode/DG_070332
it doesn't apply either way. they are 2 different concepts of "right of way"
- one is the right to do something - what you appear to be referring to
- the other is one person's right over another's in a situation where they otherwise would conflict - both can't have right of way, or if they do they just crash as both try and enforce it
the 1776 act may give a general right to do something but it doesn't seem to set out rights in the second form
pogofish
Testicle Hairstyle
Which is where the Common Law judgements come-in and they tend to be squarely on the side of the pedestrian.
pogofish
Testicle Hairstyle
This might be appropriate -
So nothing new there then!
From a subscribed paper at work:
Making roads safer for pedestrians or keeping them out of the way? An historical perspective on pedestrian policies in Britain. Author(s): Muhammad Ishaque, Robert Noland. Manchester University Press, 2006
It is also interesting to see just how haphazard and arbritary the development of pedestrian facillities was between the 1840s and 1930s. Often the decisions of individual comissioners and officers mattered as much as any legislation - Which all probably counts towards the confusion today?
So nothing new there then!
From a subscribed paper at work:
Making roads safer for pedestrians or keeping them out of the way? An historical perspective on pedestrian policies in Britain. Author(s): Muhammad Ishaque, Robert Noland. Manchester University Press, 2006
It is also interesting to see just how haphazard and arbritary the development of pedestrian facillities was between the 1840s and 1930s. Often the decisions of individual comissioners and officers mattered as much as any legislation - Which all probably counts towards the confusion today?
Geri
wasn't born to follow
an old couple got splatted by a bus in town on wednesday after just stepping out into the road... not nice
Yeah, I saw that in the paper. It must have been horrific. Which part of the road was it? I couldn't work it out from the pics, looked as if the bus was coming down Old Market and past the Evening Post building.
from a bit of brief research as far as i can see the neither pedestrians nor cars/vans/cycles/motorbikes/lorries etc. have priority on roads in general. both have an equal right to use the road and both have a duty to take care. the only time one type of traffic will have priority is when there are specific restrictions in place - so pedestrian crossings, traffic lights, motorways.
