How To Come Forward With Unquestionable Proof of Who Was At Fault For A Given Accident

This is the question that faces both the injury lawyer for the plaintiff, the injured victim and the defendant’s lawyer. Both lawyers would like to show that the other party deserves to be saddled with at least a portion of the blame for the injury-causing occurrence. Yet both of them realize what has to be proved, in order to convince a judge that more than one person was at-fault for a given accident.

What was the duty of care of the plaintiff and the defendant?

According to the law, no one should face an unnecessary danger. If at some point the plaintiff had invited danger, then he or she had been a bit negligent and could be held partly at-fault. On the other hand if the defendant had put the plaintiff in danger, then the defendant’s actions could be pointed to as those typical of a negligent party.

Before introduction of seat belts in automobiles, car manufacturers got blamed for a majority of the deaths and injuries suffered by drivers and passengers. Once motor vehicles got equipped with seat belts, motorists could be charged for failing to wear them. Still, the introduction of seat belts has not clarified all the issues that relate to the duty of care for a passenger and a vehicle’s owner.

Does the owner of a bus have a duty to install seat belts, so that the passengers do not face an added level of danger? Does some person that has a pre-existing medical condition have a duty to wear an extra seat belt, so that he or she can mitigate the chances of any injury at the time of a collision?

Those are examples of questions that have been raised by personal injury lawyer in Sherwood Park, following a specific accident. Some got raised in a courtroom. Others affected the negotiations that preceded a settlement, because a given injury lawyer felt reluctant to take a given case to court.

Did either the plaintiff or the defendant perform a careless act during the time leading up to the accidental occurrence?

Did either of them carry out an action that a reasonable person would not have performed? Did either of them fail to perform an action that a reasonable person would have viewed as necessary?

Would it seem reasonable to demand that all bus owners had to install seat belts on all of the seats? Would it seem reasonable to require every person with an existing medical condition to wear two seat belts, whenever he or she was driving a car or riding in an automobile? Those are the sorts of questions that have to be answered before anyone can bring forward unquestionable proof of who should be labeled “at-fault” for a given accident.