SBS Transit Ltd v Stafford Rosemary Anne Jane (administratrix of the estate of Anthony John Stafford, deceased)

• Jurisdiction: Singapore
• Judge: Chan Sek Keong CJ
• Judgment Date: 30 January 2007
• Neutral Citation: [2007] SGCA 7
• Docket Number: Civil Appeal No 67 of 2006
• Date: 30 January 2007
• Published date: 31 January 2007
• Year: 2007
• Plaintiff Counsel: Anthony Wee (United Legal Alliance LLC)
• Citation: [2007] SGCA 7
• Defendant Counsel: Lynette Chew Mei Lin and Sharmini Selvaratnam (Harry Elias Partnership)
• Court: Court of Appeal (Singapore)
• Subject Matter: Whether motorcyclist's blood alcohol concentration of 68mg/100ml rendering him unfit to ride at time of accident,Whether motorcyclist contributorily negligent by proceeding straight across intersection even though traffic light green in his favour,Contributory negligence,Motorcyclist and bus colliding in intersection,Tort,Negligence,Motorcyclist killed in collision

30 January 2007 Judgment reserved.

Lee Seiu Kin J (delivering the judgment of the court):

Introduction

1 This is an appeal by SBS Transit Ltd (“SBS” or “the Appellant”) against the decision of Kan Ting Chiu J (“the trial judge”) delivered on 11 May 2006 in Suit No 430 of 2004 (“Suit 430”): see Stafford Rosemary Anne Jane v Goo Tong Sing [2006] 3 SLR 277. Suit 430 was an action for damages under: (a) s 20 of the Civil Law Act (Cap 43, 1999 Rev Ed) (“CLA”) for the benefit of the dependants of Mr Anthony John Stafford (“the Deceased”); and (b) s 21 of the CLA in respect of damages for bereavement for the benefit of the Deceased’s wife, Rosemary Anne Jane Stafford. Rosemary Anne Jane Stafford is also the administratrix of the Deceased’s estate and in that capacity, she was the plaintiff in Suit 430 and the respondent in the present appeal.

2 Suit 430 arose from a road traffic accident involving the Deceased, who was riding his motorcycle, and a double-decker SBS bus at the intersection of Clementi Road and Commonwealth Avenue West (“the Intersection”). The Deceased died on the spot from injuries suffered in the accident. The plaintiff brought the action against the bus driver as the first defendant, and his employer, the Appellant, as the second defendant. The bus driver subsequently pleaded guilty to a charge under s 304A of the Penal Code (Cap 224, 1985 Rev Ed) for causing the death of the Deceased by a negligent act not amounting to homicide, namely, by failing to give way to the Deceased’s motorcycle. However, he died (from a cause unrelated to the accident) before the hearing of the action. Suit 430 thus proceeded solely against the second defendant, the Appellant in this appeal.

3 The issue in Suit 430 was one of negligence on the part of the bus driver and/or contributory negligence on the part of the Deceased. The trial judge found for the plaintiff (the respondent in the present appeal) and held the bus driver wholly responsible for the accident.

4 In this appeal, the Appellant relies on a single issue, ie, whether the Deceased was contributorily negligent. The Appellant contends that the Deceased ought to have exercised greater care in proceeding across the Intersection as he ought reasonably to have apprehended the danger involved in the circumstances of that unfortunate evening.

The facts

5 The accident took place on the night of 12 January 2002 at about 8.09pm The Deceased was riding his Harley Davidson motorcycle along Clementi Road heading towards the Intersection in the direction of Upper Bukit Timah Road. The SBS bus had come from the opposite direction along Clementi Road, and was making a right turn into Commonwealth Avenue West towards Boon Lay. The collision occurred inside the Intersection while the Deceased was proceeding across it and the bus was making a right turn.

6 Clementi Road and Commonwealth Avenue West intersect at almost right angles. Entering the Intersection, there were four lanes on Clementi Road in the direction of Ayer Rajah Expressway (the direction the bus was taking). The traffic layout and signalisation sequence have since been changed, but at the time, the right-most lane (ie lane 1) was exclusively for vehicles turning right. The lane next to it (ie lane 2) was for vehicles turning right or going straight. There were right-turn pockets marked for those two lanes. Lanes 3 and 4 were for vehicles going straight.

7 In the opposite direction and heading towards Upper Bukit Timah Road, which was the direction the Deceased was heading, there were also four lanes. Lane 1, the right-most lane, was for vehicles turning right and lane 2 was for vehicles turning right or going straight. Lanes 3 and 4 were for vehicles going straight. There were no turning pockets for any of the right-turn lanes. In both directions, about 30m or so before the Intersection, lane 4 also led to a slip road for vehicles turning left into Commonwealth Avenue West.

8 The traffic signalisation sequence at the Intersection which was in operation at the material time in relation to vehicles approaching from Clementi Road was as follows. There was a green light for traffic proceeding straight along Clementi Road in either direction, followed by an amber light preceding the red light. When the light turned red, the green right-turn arrow would light for traffic to turn right in both directions. Since there was no red right-turn arrow light prohibiting a right turn during the green phase, this meant that vehicles along Clementi Road in either direction could turn right at the Intersection if it was safe to do so. There is no dispute that traffic proceeding straight along Clementi Road had the right of way during the green phase.

9 At the time of the accident, the traffic flow was moderate, the weather was fine, the road surface was dry, the Intersection was well-lit and visibility was clear. The Deceased died from the multiple injuries suffered in the accident and was found to have had a blood alcohol concentration (“BAC”) of 68mg/100ml at the time of the accident.

The evidence

10 Low Chong Eng (“Low”) witnessed the accident and he gave evidence at the trial below. Low’s evidence was accepted by the trial judge, who found him to be a careful witness whose evidence could be relied upon.

11 Low’s evidence was as follows:

(a) Both Low and the bus driver were travelling along Clementi Road in the direction of Ayer Rajah Expressway. They had both stopped at the Intersection with the intention to turn right into Commonwealth Avenue West in the direction of Boon Lay. Low’s car was at lane 2 and the bus at lane 1, to Low’s immediate right.

(b) When the traffic lights turned green, both vehicles moved into their respective right-turn pockets to await clearance of oncoming traffic before turning right into Commonwealth Avenue West.

(c) At one point, Low noticed the bus inching forward out of its right-turn pocket. He described it as moving at a constant speed “slightly faster than walking pace”. Low was about to follow suit, but when he looked at the traffic light, he saw that it was still at the green phase. At that instant, he saw a motorcycle approaching the Intersection from the opposite direction.

(d) When Low first observed the motorcycle, the bus had reached the middle of the Intersection. The motorcycle was approaching from lane 4, ie, the left-most lane. Low noticed that the bus continued inching forward although the light for traffic going straight was still green and the green right-turn arrow light had not come on. In Low’s words, the bus then “hesitated, it slowed down, then it decided to complete the right turn”. The motorcyclist entered the Intersection at a constant speed, without slowing down, and the collision occurred.

12 The sketch plan prepared by the traffic police showed the bus at a position 2m from the edge of the yellow-box intersection, that is to say it had blocked all but 2m of the left-most lane of Clementi Road on which the Deceased was travelling. However, this merely showed the final position of the bus after the accident; this might not have been the position of the bus at the moment of collision.

13 There were glass and other fragments on the road at the front right corner of the bus, but there were no skid marks, scratch marks or brake marks at the scene of the accident. The police investigation officer confirmed that a person travelling in the direction taken by the deceased would have seen the Intersection clearly from a distance of 150m, and that there was a slight downward slope along that stretch of the road. This was corroborated by Low who said that he could see about 100m ahead.

14 As regards the alcohol in the Deceased’s body, evidence regarding its possible effect(s) on the Deceased at the time of the accident was furnished to the court by two expert witnesses – Dr Lim Yun Chin (“Dr Lim”) for the Appellant and Prof Edmund Lee (“Prof Lee”) for the respondent.

15 Dr Lim was of the view that some impairment of judgment would be present even at BACs of less than 50mg/100ml, and hence, with a BAC of 68mg/100ml, the Deceased would have suffered a significant impairment of his driving ability at the time of the accident.

16 Prof Lee’s position was that any individual with a BAC of 68mg/100ml would have a significant degree of impairment of co-ordination and motor skills, but the precise level of impairment for any particular individual remained fairly speculative.

17 The Deceased’s colleague and friend of more than 20 years, Mr Michael Andrew Negus (“Negus”), was the last person to see the Deceased prior to the accident. He gave evidence that the Deceased had consumed two glasses of beer at a bar from about 7.15pm to 8.00pm Negus said that when the Deceased left the bar at 8.00pm, some ten minutes before the accident, he did not appear flushed, drunk or intoxicated.

The decision below

18 At the trial, the Appellant contended that the Deceased had entered the Intersection against red traffic lights. The bus driver had stated in his police report that the Deceased had ridden into the Intersection after the traffic light had turned red and the green right-turn arrow light had come on. In contrast, in his affidavit of evidence-in-chief, the bus driver had said that the red light had come on, but he was not sure if the green right-turn arrow light had come on yet when he saw the motorcycle. The bus driver had died before the trial and was therefore not cross-examined. The trial judge accepted Low’s evidence that the bus driver made the right turn while the traffic lights were green in the Deceased’s favour and before the green right-turn arrow came on.

19 As to the manner in which the Deceased was riding his motorcycle, except for the account given by the bus driver, there was no direct evidence showing that he was doing it in a reckless or negligent manner. In his affidavit of evidence-in-chief, the bus driver said that the motorcycle was travelling at a fast...