Should (by Law) The Car Give Way in The Following Scenario of Car Vs Pedestrian

• 

  bobbified on 27/02/2023 - 08:53

  +19

  Cars must always give way to pedestrians, especially if there's a risk of a collision, but with the drivers we have here, I wouldn't be relying on them to do so, so better to trust yourself!

  • 

    freefall101 on 27/02/2023 - 09:35

    +4

    The question was about right of way though. Cars have to be prepared for pedestrians to cross the road and react accordingly (including stopping), but that doesn't mean the pedestrian has the right of way. It's illegal for pedestrians to block traffic and they only have right of way (in a bunch of circumstances that don't include traffic going straight ahead at a stop sign)[https://www.nsw.gov.au/driving-boating-and-transport/roads-safety-and-rules/overtaking-and-merging/sharing-roads-pedestrians].

    The driver would still be at fault if they plowed down OP (which is little consolation), but OP would have also been wrong in this scenario for moving into the path of a vehicle.

    In reality, there's nothing I trust less than a driver trying to cross a busy main road and I'd definitely let them go by first.

  • 

    pegaxs on 27/02/2023 - 11:44

    +1

    Cars must always give way to pedestrians

    Sauce on that? Where in the road rules does it say "cars must always give way to pedestrians". I can only find the part where it says pedestrians are not to walk out in front of cars and make an obstruction on themselves.

    I can find a few references to cars being required to giveweay (turning, road related areas, that kind of thing) but no "always".

    • 

      bobbified on 27/02/2023 - 18:13

      -3

      It's not specifically written in the rules. But if you hit someone and there's any chance a reasonable person (sometimes even in hindsight) could've seen that an "accident" would be likely, liability falls on the driver.

      Example 1: If you drive through a shopping centre area where there's lots of people and someone steps out onto the road and you hit them, a court is likely to find that the driver is "mostly" liable because a reasonable person could've forseen that someone might step out onto the road. So the driver should've slowed down. I say 'mostly' because a level of contributory negligence might into play depending on the individual circumstances.

      Example 2: If a driver is driving along a street with lots of parked cars (and there are no other people around) and someone suddenly steps out onto the road from behind a parked truck, then gets hit, then the driver is not liable.

      If I turn it the other way - as a pedestrian, if you're standing on an island in the middle of the road (clearly visible to traffic), suddenly stepped onto the road and got hit, you'll still get a payout (or least have your medical expenses paid).

      (I do suspect a lot of the liability being awarded against drivers has to do with the fact that CTP insurance is compulsory so the 'driver' never actually has to pay costs out of their own pocket. It's always an insurance company paying it out. There's even a pool of money that's there to pay for injuries that are caused by unidentified vehicles).

      Sauce: Previously, not just property damage, but also CTP claims assessor (in NSW).

    • 

      pjcook on 28/02/2023 - 08:21

      Tomato

    • 

      BatsRule on 28/02/2023 - 15:25

      its a 100 year old rule. that stands up in court. however , this may of changed recently or removed from the rules …?

    • 

      brosk1s on 04/03/2023 - 00:39

      I'm plenty late to the party but having just read this thread, yes you are correct that giving way to pedestrians is legislated in law at any give way points/crossings, but there is not a specific rule explictly legislating this following statement in road legislation outside of giveway points/crossings:

      "You must also give way to pedestrians if there is a danger of colliding with them, even if there is no marked pedestrian crossing." - Transport for NSW

      How that statement is enforced is a more complex duty of care argument (to take reasonable steps not to cause harm to others) mixing common law such as the Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW) (Austl.) with relevant road legislation such as under the Road Transport Act 2013 (NSW) s. 117.1 (Austl.) "A person must not drive a motor vehicle on a road negligently".

  • 

    Danstar on 27/02/2023 - 13:51

    -7

    Ummm are roads made for cars or for pedestrians to cross?

    Unless it's a Zebra crossing or an intersection with crossing lights; cars should never stop for pedestrians.

    Especially around schools; so many kids walk without even looking expecting cars to stop; or cars decide to stop in the middle of a road or half way through exiting a round about to stop for someone wanting to cross the road and have caused an accident or almost caused an accident.

    Worse is; the kids who get used to thinking they can just cross when ever; and almost get hit.

    PEDESTRIANS WAIT FOR CARS if not at a specified pedestrian crossing!

    • 

      bobbified on 27/02/2023 - 17:19

      +3

      PEDESTRIANS WAIT FOR CARS if not at a specified pedestrian crossing!

      Wait for a pedestrian to step out and run them over and you'll find out very quickly.

      Unless someone steps out from behind a huge truck (and there's no chance you could've stopped) you, as a driver, have an obligation to slow down where there's a reasonably foreseeable chance of a collision with a pedestrian.

      • 

        Danstar on 27/02/2023 - 20:53

        -2

        If a pedestrian steps out assuming every car is going to stop; in the end it’s the pedestrians fault. Cross roads at points they’re meant to be crossed!

        • 

          Aarchangel on 28/02/2023 - 07:52

          +2

          @Danstar: You've got to marvel the time we currently live in where you get negged for stating something that's a matter of common sense!

          • 

            Danstar on 28/02/2023 - 07:56

            -2

            @Aarchangel: I don't know what world people live in where they think pedestrians have right of way in any instance other than what I've stated.

            I'm assuming these people would also stop on a main road / highway going 80km/h and just randomly stop if they see someone wanting to cross the road.

          • 

            Euphemistic on 28/02/2023 - 08:14

            @Aarchangel: The beg is probably for the inference that you can only cross at a crossing. Sure, let’s go and install thousands of crossings that hardly get used just so no one has to cross wheee there isn’t one.

            • 

              Danstar on 28/02/2023 - 08:19

              +1

              @Euphemistic: You can cross where ever you like; the point is, it's not up to cars to stop for pedestrians in any instance other than when required by road rules (zebra crossings, pedestrian crossings) or when it won't affect other drivers.

              Eg. if you're reversing out of your drive way and someone is passing by. By all means stop. If you're turning into a street in a built up area and someone has already started crossing, by all means stop.

              I'm referring to times where people are crossing busy roads, roundabouts, etc. expecting cars to stop in the middle of the road to allow them to cross.

              • 

                Euphemistic on 28/02/2023 - 09:48

                @Danstar: If you are reversing out your driveway you are required to give way to pedestrians.

                • 

                  Danstar on 28/02/2023 - 10:10

                  @Euphemistic: Ok…

                  • 

                    Euphemistic on 28/02/2023 - 11:43

                    @Danstar: https://www.nsw.gov.au/driving-boating-and-transport/roads-s…

                    http://www5.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_reg/rr2014104…

                    It’s there. Entering or leaving a driveway.

                    Maybe you could learn the rules.

                    • 

                      Danstar on 28/02/2023 - 11:59

                      @Euphemistic: I don’t need to know the rules for common sense. As I said before I would do that and expect others to do that as it makes sense.

                      It doesn’t make sense for drivers to stop on main roads to allow for pedestrians to cross the road (illegally albeit)

                      • 

                        Euphemistic on 28/02/2023 - 13:06

                        @Danstar: This is part of the problem. It’s not common sense. It’s a rule, and it was made a rule for a reason. Pedestrians shouldn’t have to hop out of the way so that a car to carry on.

                        Aussie driving culture has developed to be ‘might is right’ and that cars should be able to continue on at the speed limit with no obstruction. We need to change that to a more defensive point of view where we expect things to occur and are ready to give way or react appropriately.

                        • 

                          Danstar on 28/02/2023 - 14:16

                          @Euphemistic: You're only thinking of simple giving way to pedestrians in suburban streets with little to no traffic and speed limits of 40/50kms/h

                          Are you of the opinion that it's ok for pedestrians to cross any where and anytime and expect cars to stop for them regardless of the road type, traffic conditions, etc.)?

                          Have you gone to a school pick up and you see kids of all ages just crossing roads without even looking? That is just plain dangerous to teach kids (and adults) to think that they have the right of way in every situation.

                          • 

                            Euphemistic on 28/02/2023 - 16:04

                            -1

                            @Danstar: I kinda agree with you. Yes, it’s dangerous to let people think that they can just step out into the roads, but I also think that it’s almost as dangerous to build roads that pedestrians may want to cross while car drivers think they have ‘right of way’ when they don’t. No one has right of way. It’s a bad concept that isn’t compatible with defensive driving.

                            As for schools, kids are unpredictable so they probably should be 20km/h zones in those crazy busy pick up zones and 40km/h for the rest of the day.

                            We need to change our thinking on vehicle transport on all except major transport routes that don’t have people who want active transport wanting to cross the roads. We need to create a situation where it is easy to walk/cycle/scooter around without fear of being collected by a car. Stop our reliance on cars for short journeys etc.

                            We’ve spent too long with a car centric society focused on getting from A-B as fast as possible and screw everyone who is along the side of the road. In built up areas it’s time to turn that around.

        • 

          ColtNoir on 28/02/2023 - 22:49

          @Danstar: Look up the road rules.
          Or (profanity) around and find out

          • 

            Danstar on 01/03/2023 - 09:39

            @ColtNoir: or around and find out ?

            • 

              ColtNoir on 01/03/2023 - 11:53

              @Danstar: Got filtered

              Eff (profanity filtered) around and find out

              • 

                Danstar on 01/03/2023 - 12:20

                @ColtNoir: Like I said; it seems as though common sense are the road rules; and pedestrians are not given right of way. Ie. jay walking

                • 

                  ColtNoir on 02/03/2023 - 14:18

                  @Danstar: But they are given right of way. Even if pedestrians are doing the wrong thing eg jaywalking.

                  Just because it's not common for people to do it doesn't matter. It's also a requirement to indicate at all times when moving or turning, doesn't mean people do it.

                  • 

                    Danstar on 02/03/2023 - 14:28

                    @ColtNoir: Jaywalkers get fined. They're not given "right of way", cars obviously cannot hit a pedestrian on purpose because they're jaywalking

                    • 

                      ColtNoir on 02/03/2023 - 14:30

                      @Danstar: Yeah they get fined. What happens to a driver if they don't give way to a jaywalking pedestrian? Insurance claim at a minimum, charges as well if they say anything dumb to the cops.

                      • 

                        Danstar on 03/03/2023 - 12:59

                        @ColtNoir: So the first instance of law breaking is the person walking across the road.

                      • 

                        Euphemistic on 03/03/2023 - 21:53

                        @ColtNoir: If a driver hits a pedestrian crossing against the rules there will be mitigating circumstances for the driver. This doesn’t absolve them from responsibility might merely downgrade their charges - plus they need to live with potentially killing a person.

                        If the driver had ample opportunity to avoid the incident but did not attempt to avoid it they are totally screwed.

                        Recently some arrogant so and so decided to cross a busy road in front of me (and other cars) against the crossing lights, so jaywalking. Made no attempt to hurry to cross and caused me to slow down or I would have hit him. I had to give way, or bear the consequences of hitting a pedestrian.

                  • 

                    Euphemistic on 03/03/2023 - 21:51

                    @ColtNoir: No one is given “right of way”. A jaywalking pedestrian is doing the wrong thing but doesn’t mean the car does not need to attempt to give way.

    • 

      pjcook on 28/02/2023 - 08:25

      I wouldn't like to test your theory in court mate……

      https://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/safety-and-road-rules/driver…

      • 

        Danstar on 28/02/2023 - 08:44

        I only had a quick look at that link; but it looked like all those situations are where a vehicle is already stopped, which is fine. I'm referring to situations where cars stop in the middle of the road cos they think they're doing the right thing by giving pedestrians right of way.

• 

  Archi on 27/02/2023 - 09:00

  +16

  not much use for excercising and enforcing "your right of way" as a pedestrian when you are dead.

  to me most scenarios pedestrians have a right of way.. but i will actively give way to vehicles and watch where i am going, thats just common sense.

  • 

    SF3 on 27/02/2023 - 09:15

    +1

    enforcing "your right of way" as a pedestrian when you are dead.

    Could be found in the right at the “gates of heaven”.

• 

  SF3 on 27/02/2023 - 09:11

  +8

  Right of Way

  That law, is significantly less powerful than the laws of physics.

• 

  lostgoat on 27/02/2023 - 09:21

  +3

  Seriously its a jungle out there . Teaching my kids to cross the road 1) Pedestrian crossings make sure the cars are really slowing down or stopped before you cross. If I follow the road laws and assumed cars would stop I would be seriously injured or 6 foot under . Check at lights and Lollipop crossings as well . Intersections I teach them to go 20-30 metres down the road to avoid trusting cars to stop and have to good eye sight if a car is turning into the street . A more advance stop look or listen by putting listen in front of that. In the suburbs you can normally tell by listening when the road is safer to cross as the first step .

• 

  Euphemistic on 27/02/2023 - 09:36

  +5

  There is no right of way in traffic law. No one has right of way.

  Please change the topic title to be ‘“”who should GIVE WAY”

• 

  [Deactivated] on 27/02/2023 - 09:45

  +1

  You have the right, the car has the might.
  If you can see a car coming it is probably best for you to stop as they may not see you.
  Better to stop for an extra 5 seconds than be dead for a lifetime.

• 

  pegaxs on 27/02/2023 - 09:56

  +7

  I swear these posts are deliberately written to make me slap my own face…

  I have "Right of way"

  You have no "rights" when it comes to road rules, only obligations on you or the other drivers. In fact, Road Rule 236 strips most of those "rights" off the pedestrian.

  Is this a marked crossing? Are there any signs for the pedestrian? Is the driver passed the stop line before you arrive/start to cross?

  If I was to guess, I would say no, you dont have "RiGhT oF WaY!!1!!" because, as a pedestrian, you are also required to NOT move into the path of a vehicle (RR236). Also, RR67 applies to stop signs at intersections and there is no rule written here that says a car must stop for a pedestrian in your situation.

  Only Subrule (4) covers anything to do with pedestrians at stop signs and that is only referencing right or left turns or U-turns. It says nothing about giving way if going straight.

  (4) If the driver is turning left or right or making a U-turn, the driver must also give way to any pedestrian at or near the intersection who is crossing the road, or part of the road, the driver is entering.

  But in saying all this, there are two BIG stupids at play here. A car would be stupid to hit a pedestrian and the pedestrian would be equally as stupid to step out in front of cars (which they are not allowed to do in RR236 anyway) and either would be stupid to claim "BuT MuH RiGhT oF Way!!11!!!"

  I cant click either answer because both are wrong… but if there was another option, I would say that the pedestrian has to give way in this case based on Road Rule 236(1) and (2) and 67(4).

  • 

    GordonD on 27/02/2023 - 10:53

    I've looked at all the sources I know of, and the scenario the OP suggests seems to be one the rules don't clearly cover.

    It is clear if you are turning into or out of a road. The car has to give way to the pedestrian crossing the road the car is turning into or out of.

    It is clear if there is no STOP or GIVE WAY sign or pedestrian crossing. The pedestrian crossing the same road the car is continuing along has to give way to the car.

    Here in SA the government road rules web sites say that at a STOP or GIVE WAY sign the car has to give way to any vehicle (with exceptions) or pedestrian "at or near" the sign or line. But it isn't made clear whether a pedestrian crossing the same road on the OTHER side of the intersection is "near" the sign or line.

    • 

      mapax on 27/02/2023 - 11:16

      The car has to give way to the pedestrian crossing the road the car is turning into or out of.

      Not in NSW.

      Rule 353(1) specifies that a driver is not required to give way to a pedestrian who is crossing the road that the driver is leaving

    • 

      pegaxs on 27/02/2023 - 11:47

      Here in SA

      Meh. Not applicable to OP. Assume based on their "Location: Sydney" they are in NSW.

      "at or near" the sign or line.

      "At or near" suggests "at" or "near" not "on the complete opposite side of the road…"

      • 

        GordonD on 27/02/2023 - 12:37

        "At or near" suggests "at" or "near" not "on the complete opposite side of the road…"

        The rule on giving way at a STOP or GIVE WAY applies to car on the complete opposite side of the road. Are you saying it doesn't apply to a pedestrian on the complete opposite side of the road?

        I'm not saying it does. I'm just suggesting that that is exactly why I think its not clear. Because common sense suggests that a pedestrian isn't "near" a STOP sign on the other side of the road, but we know the law doesn't see it that way when it comes to a car.

  • 

    Chandler on 27/02/2023 - 12:13

    As per mapax's comment, 353 References to pedestrians crossing a road

    (1) If a driver who is turning from a road at an intersection is required to give way to a pedestrian who is crossing the road that the driver is entering, the driver is only required to give way to the pedestrian if the pedestrian’s line of travel in crossing the road is essentially perpendicular to the edges of the road the driver is entering—the driver is not required to give way to a pedestrian who is crossing the road the driver is leaving.

    My take from this rule is that RR67 does not apply to pedestrians crossing the road the car/vehicle is exiting, nor to pedestrians crossing the road the car/vehicle is entering if the pedestrian is not crossing perpendicular (i.e. walking diagonally across the road).

• 

  [Deactivated] on 27/02/2023 - 10:20

  +3

  Just voting for pedestrian so dumb kents like op can rest in peace.

• 

  brownsound on 27/02/2023 - 10:24

  -3

  road is for the cars, not people.

  • 

    pegaxs on 27/02/2023 - 10:32

    -1

    road is for the cars motor vehicles, not people.

    FTFY… Covered under Road Rule 12)

    • 

      Euphemistic on 27/02/2023 - 11:17

      Bicycles?

      • 

        pegaxs on 27/02/2023 - 11:40

        Covered under "vehicles"…

        Road Rule 15(b) What is a Vehicle

        A vehicle includes—
        (b) a bicycle

  • 

    Nugs on 27/02/2023 - 11:19

    +1

    and not a pack of 3 wide MAMILs too
    .

    • 

      pegaxs on 27/02/2023 - 11:49

      lol. Didnt know what a MAMIL was until I Googled and this was my top result

      • 

        Nugs on 27/02/2023 - 12:16

        +2

        nearly 3 wide by himself
        .

• 

  buckster on 27/02/2023 - 10:27

  In that case, it probably depends on who takes off first. If the car has stopped and then starts moving across the road before you've gotten to the curb or started crossing, you should wait, otherwise you're jumping out in front of traffic in effect.

  If you're ready to cross before that car has stopped for the stop sign, then you should be clear as the car would be braking the stop sign if they continued through

  • 

    Archi on 27/02/2023 - 10:35

    +1

    in real world application…

    you stop and wait for the car to pass before you cross.

    • 

      cameldownunder on 27/02/2023 - 11:13

      If I ( OP ) would move onto the Road, while the car is stopped, the car would actually accelerate into me.
      But if the car sees there is a tight gap for him to cross inbetweener cars on the main road, and I am now on the road, driver would have to make a choice to either run me over, or brake and possibly get T-Boned by the cars on the main road. Pretty sure I know what the driver will do.

• 

  Ughhh on 27/02/2023 - 11:03

  +1

  If you're the pedestrian, you have "the other drivers obligation to give way" (lol) to you. Though keep in mind that driver may be too focused on looking out for cars left and right to see you. So maybe don't cross if the road is clear and the driver may cross.

• 

  Jonc on 27/02/2023 - 13:30

  If the car was 'turning' into a new road they they would have to give way but as they are continuing straight I believe the car would have right of way.

  Checking the QLD road rules I could not find this exact situation… https://www.qld.gov.au/transport/safety/rules/road/give-way

  I think from a safety and drivers perspective it would be dangerous if the car does not have right of way for the following reason:

  • Car comes to a stop checks ahead to ensure there is room for them to move forward (person has not stepped onto the road yet)
  • Driver checks left, right. left..etc. for other cars and continues straight if no cars…
  • If the person then enters the road (essentially in front of the car's path, the driver has no option but to stop in the middle of the intersection of which cars behind would have moved up and means the car is in a very dangerous position and must be avoided…)
• 

  RedFromBlue on 28/02/2023 - 07:31

  Poll needs another option, since there is no right of way in any state in AU. Vehicle must give way to pedestrian. Pedestrian should be vigilant and be looking at what that vehicles intension could be, making eye contact is a good idea. It is common for vehicles not to give way to pedestrians, or for pederstrians to wave vehicles through. It is understood that the driver of the vehicle should know the road rules, the pedestrian on the other hand can be a non driver, as such not need to be aware of the rules. Mo sense in walking on to cross the road if the car is accellerating in that direction, no point being hit be a car regardless of who would be at fault, vigilance and attention required.

• 

  backpaqer on 28/02/2023 - 08:38

  The law tends to only come into play in order to award damages or judge negligence and penalty. It is wise to avoid relying on the law to step in and knock your heads together. As a driver it is your responsibility to drive within your limits and be prepared to avoid situations where the law comes in to judge your actions. As a pedestrian it is your responsibility to be aware of your surroundings and minimize your risks where possible though you see so many walking around with their nose glued to their phones and getting upset when something "comes out of nowhere". Thing about law also is that everyone thinks there is just one line and they tend to operate either side of it (40kmh zones in the middle of nowhere with no roadworks in sight who is obeying that) but there's many lines and to walk away from a legal stoush victorious might be thought of as a win, how much time and stress has it cost you? Best approach to road is treat all pedestrians or cyclists as if they are your best friend, child, parent etc and to treat all drivers as if they're out to kill you. If a driver gets it wrong the outcome can be catastrophic for the pedestrian or cyclist. If the pedestrian or cyclist get it wrong it's usually catastrophic for themselves.

• 

  cameldownunder on 28/02/2023 - 09:35

  I can see there is as much doubt in the responses, and good common sense as in my head.

  My walk to the station is the same walk kids have to do to get to school, and there is this one crossing, with 3 stop signs on each side, and every month one of the stop signs is knocked down. Now I do a calculated "Step in front" of cars turning into the road I am crossing, and only if there are no kids at the crossing, as I dont want them to imitate me. There were several occasions where words were flying ( only words ). I hope this "conflict" with some people makes them aware that they need to give way, as there are many kids that cross that road.

  But I am honestly not sure about the scenario in the Description. I prefer to wait, so that kids waiting at the crossing do the same.

• 

  2esc on 28/02/2023 - 11:00

  +2

  Personally when crossing any road i dont trust the car driver to stop.