When the Bicyclist is Obligated to Provide the Jogger with Pain Relief
When a cyclist wants to pass a jogger on a shared path designed for both walking and cycling, they need to exercise caution. If they move too close and too swiftly, they might end up in legal trouble following an accident. This was confirmed by a ruling in the Regional Court of Wiesbaden. The German Lawyers' Association (DAV) brought this to light (Case No. 9 S 3/24).
The scenario: A man was jogging on an asphalt-paved shared path. A speedy cyclist approached from behind, intending to overtake the jogger. During the overtaking maneuver, both parties collided, causing harm to themselves. The jogger sustained a concussion, was transported to the hospital for observation, and ultimately required an overnight stay. Due to disagreements over fault, the incident ended up in court.
Erroneous speed and proximity
The verdict: The Regional Court declared the cyclist solely responsible for the mishap. They deemed the cyclist to have disregarded the jogger, and they passed too quickly and too closely. The court determined that the jogger committed no traffic-related violations. He was under no obligation to respond to the cyclist approaching from behind. Consequently, the cyclist was ordered to pay 500 euros in compensation to the jogger.
Generally speaking: Cyclists must always maintain control over their vehicles properly. This encompasses adjusting speed based on conditions such as the state of the path, traffic situation, weather, and visibility. If these parameters are not taken into account, cyclists – just like any other road users – can be held liable for their negligence in the event of an accident. Regardless of the actual fault, this rule still applies if, for example, red traffic lights and other traffic regulations are treated as impediments to free expression.
The man on the jog was unhurt by his control over his pace and awareness of his surroundings, but the speedy cyclist's lack of consideration while overtaking resulted in their collision. Despite the cyclist's argument that the jogger should have responded to their approach, the court ruled that the cyclist's erroneous speed and proximity made them solely responsible for the accident, requiring them to pay compensation.
