Should cyclists wear helmets?

The case of Smith v Finch (2009)All ER(D)158(Jan) is potentially a worrying development in the law for cyclists who do not wear protective helmets.

The facts of the case are straightforward enough.  One summer’s evening in 2005 Smith was travelling from his home in Essex to another house a short distance away when he had a cycling accident.  As he was nearing the end of his journey he positioned himself towards the centre of the road to make a right hand turn into the driveway of his destination. 

As he did so, Finch riding a motorcycle at excessive speed in the same direction, attempted to overtake Smith on his offside.  A collision resulted and Smith, the cyclist, sustained a significant brain injury.

The judge in the case rejected Finch’s argument that Smith had emerged from a side street without giving way straight into his path.  The judge found in favour of Smith.

However, Smith had not been wearing a cycle helmet and Finch’s lawyers argued that as a result Smith was partly to blame for his own brain injury.

The judge agreed with part of this argument saying that there can be no doubt that the failure to wear a helmet may expose a cyclist to a greater risk of injury.

It turned out in the case that no reduction for contributory negligence was made to Smith’s damages because Finch’s lawyers could not demonstrate that wearing a helmet would have made a difference to the injuries sustained. 

Despite this decision, the case leaves open the possibility that Defendants will be able to reduce damages awarded to cyclists in the future in cases where cyclists have failed to wear a helmet.  This may well be so even though there is currently no law requiring a cyclist to wear a helmet.