IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA

Date: 20110805

Docket: 32765

Registry:
Penticton

Between:

Keith Robbins

Plaintiff

And

Bradney Roy Webb

Defendant

Before:
The Honourable Mr. Justice Melnick

Reasons for Judgment

[1]            
This was a trial to determine liability for damages resulting from a
motor vehicle accident. The essential question is: who reacted to whom in
commencing the chain of events that led to the impact?

I.        Background

[2]            
Both the plaintiff, Keith Robbins (“Mr. Robbins”), and the
defendant, Bradney Roy Webb (“Mr. Webb”), lived on Green Lake Road near
Okanagan Falls on December 19, 2008. On that day, Mr. Robbins decided to
go into town for a haircut. He had already been in town that morning for a
coffee and to meet with colleagues on the Okanagan Falls Volunteer Fire
Department. He was aware that Green Lake Road was very slippery. The conditions
were icy with a light covering of snow. He left just before 11:30 a.m., driving
his daughter-in-law’s 2006 Chevrolet Cobalt automobile. Unknown to him (for he
had not checked), that vehicle was equipped with three well-worn all season
tires and one summer tread tire.

[3]            
A short distance from his driveway, Mr. Robbins was rounding a
slight right-hand corner on Green Lake Road when, he said, he saw a pickup
truck half-way in his lane. He said he applied his brakes and tried to turn to
the right. This, he said, caused the rear of his vehicle to fish-tail out to
the left. Despite that, Mr. Robbins maintained that no part of his vehicle
crossed into the oncoming, southbound lane. The car was struck on the left-hand
side by the pickup.

[4]            
Mr. Webb, on the other hand, said that he was driving his 1994
Chevrolet Silverado pickup truck south on Green Lake Road below the posted
speed limit of 50 km/hr. At a point just prior to the accident scene, he
said he observed the rear end of the vehicle driven by Mr. Robbins “kick
out” toward the centre line as the driver of the car appeared to lose control,
then regain it. In those few seconds, said Mr. Webb, he reacted in the
only way he could – he braked. At that point, he maintained, he was still fully
in his own, southbound, lane. In cross-examination he denied cutting the corner
and driving into the oncoming, northbound, lane. Mr. Webb recollected that
he stayed in the southbound lane despite having skidded when he braked and it
was the force of the collision with the Cobalt that ultimately carried his
vehicle into the northbound lane. The front left-hand corner of the Silverado
was damaged from the collision.

[5]            
The first witness on the scene was Mr. Charles Cameron (“Mr. Cameron”).
He observed skid mark tracks from the pickup, which he presumed were from its
tires being “locked up”, leading from the tires of the pickup back into the
right-hand (southbound) lane. The tracks were in a straight line to the pickup,
he said. It was pointed out to Mr. Cameron in cross-examination that in
his statement to ICBC, given a few months after the accident, he had said: “I
saw skid marks from the pickup leading from the centre of the road before the
curve through the apex of the curve, and then they kept going straight into the
oncoming northbound lane”. In cross-examination, he agreed that statement
conveyed the indication that at least part of the pickup truck was on the wrong
side of the road. However, his evidence was that what he had actually intended
by the statement was that the skid marks from the pickup had originated in the
centre of the southbound lane, not the centre of the road. He pointed to a
diagram in one of the experts’ reports to demonstrate this.

[6]            
Mr. Cameron was also on the scene for a considerable amount of
time; although not present right at the accident scene every minute of that
time (he assisted by opening the gate to the park below the accident scene
where Mr. Robbins’ vehicle had ended up).

[7]            
Mr. Fred Dobransky (“Mr. Dobransky”) and Mr. Daryl Hudson
(“Mr. Hudson”) attended the scene in response to a call placed by Mr. Robbins
to the Okanagan Falls Volunteer Fire Department (Mr. Robbins was also a
member).

[8]            
Mr. Cameron said that he saw no one kicking snow in the area of the
tire tracks left by the Silverado. This is notable because both Mr. Dobransky
and Mr. Hudson said that they saw Mr. Webb doing so in the area around
his vehicle. The effect of this, said Mr. Hudson, was to cover up the
tracks. Mr. Webb denied that he had kicked any snow or done anything to
attempt to cover the tracks of his vehicle. Mr. Hudson also said that he
could see tracks going back from the pickup for 80 to 100 feet, that they came
from the southbound lane, but that they were moving or rolling tracks and only
became skid mark tracks after they passed into the northbound lane.

[9]            
Each party called an accident reconstruction expert witness. It was
the opinion of Mr. Robbins’ expert, Mr. Andrew Craig (“Mr. Craig”),
of Crashtec Canada, that:

1.         Immediately prior to the collision the Chevrolet
Cobalt sedan was travelling 30.6 km/h.

2.         Immediately prior to the collision the Chevrolet
Silverado pick-up truck was travelling at between 32 km/h and 36 km/h.

3.         The collision occurred within the north-eastbound
traffic lane, the correct traffic lane for the Chevrolet Cobalt sedan.

4.         At point of collision
the front of the south-westbound Chevrolet Silverado pick-up truck had slid
across the centre line and the front left corner of the vehicle impacted the
left side of the Cobalt sedan within the north-eastbound traffic lane.

[10]        
It was the opinion of Mr. Webb’s expert, Mr. Jean-Francois
Goulet (“Mr. Goulet”), of MEA Forensic, that:

1)         At impact, the Webb Silverado was probably partially
in the northbound lane (the Cobalt’s lane).

2)         The Robbins Cobalt was likely significantly angled
relative to the road at impact, which is consistent with the Cobalt going
sideways before the collision.

3)         The left rear tire of the Robbins Cobalt was a
four-season tire and the right rear tire was a summer tire. This may have
adversely affected the vehicle handling and may have contributed to the loss of
control.

4)         The electronic crash data indicates that about
five seconds before impact the Cobalt was travelling at a speed of about 55
km/h.

5)         The electronic crash data indicates that Mr. Robbins
braked between about 3 and 4 seconds before the collision.

6)         The documented physical evidence does not exclude
the possibility that the Silverado was entirely in its lane at start of
skidding.

7)         The documented
physical evidence does not exclude the possibility that at some point before
the collision the Robbins Cobalt was partially across the centerline and into
the northbound lane.

[11]        
Mr. Goulet also had some criticisms of Mr. Craig’s analysis.

II.       Analysis

[12]        
I find that the most reliable evidence is that of Mr. Cameron. He
was first on the scene and has no relationship to either party. He observed the
tire tracks leading from the Silverado before anyone else was on the scene (and
before anyone could have observed Mr. Webb kicking snow, if he did kick
snow). His statement to ICBC was misleading as to the location of the tracks,
but he clarified that in evidence at trial. I have no doubt that what he meant
to convey to the ICBC adjuster is what he said in evidence at trial: skid marks
from the Silverado pickup originated in the centre of the southbound lane. I
accept this evidence over that of Mr. Hudson as Mr. Cameron would
have been in a better position to observe the truck’s tire tracks prior to
their being affected by other vehicles arriving on the scene or any other
change from the passage of time.

[13]        
Thus, I accept that Mr. Webb was fully in his own southbound lane
when he first commenced braking. I also find that the reason Mr. Webb
applied his brakes hard, locking them and causing his vehicle to slide into the
northbound lane, was because Mr. Robbins had temporarily lost control of
his vehicle due to the poor tread on the Cobalt’s tires coupled with his
driving too fast for the icy road conditions, which caused the left rear of the
Cobalt to skid sideways in a clockwise direction, crossing partially into the
southbound lane. Mr. Webb reacted to a situation precipitated by Mr. Robbins,
not the other way around.

[14]        
It may well be that if Mr. Webb had not braked, his vehicle would
not have skidded into the oncoming lane. Mr. Robbins was probably in the
process of regaining control of the Cobalt when he was struck. But, in the heat
of the moment, one cannot say that Mr. Webb’s reaction was inappropriate.
To his right was a steep uphill bank, so his options were very limited. He
reacted to the position he found himself in as a result of the negligence of Mr. Robbins.

III.       Conclusion

[15]        
I find that the accident resulted 100% from the negligence of Mr. Robbins.
Costs will follow the event on Scale B unless there is some reason to address
me concerning costs.

“Melnick
J.”