Skip to content
Law Society of Scotland
Search
Find a Solicitor
Contact us
About us
Sign in
Search
Find a Solicitor
Contact us
About us
Sign in
  • For members

    • For members

    • CPD & Training

    • Membership and fees

    • Rules and guidance

    • Regulation and compliance

    • Journal

    • Business support

    • Career growth

    • Member benefits

    • Professional support

    • Lawscot Wellbeing

    • Lawscot Sustainability

  • News and events

    • News and events

    • Law Society news

    • Blogs & opinions

    • CPD & Training

    • Events

  • Qualifying and education

    • Qualifying and education

    • Qualifying as a Scottish solicitor

    • Career support and advice

    • Our work with schools

    • Lawscot Foundation

    • Funding your education

    • Social mobility

  • Research and policy

    • Research and policy

    • Research

    • Influencing the law and policy

    • Equality and diversity

    • Our international work

    • Legal Services Review

    • Meet the Policy team

  • For the public

    • For the public

    • What solicitors can do for you

    • Making a complaint

    • Client protection

    • Find a Solicitor

    • Frequently asked questions

    • Your Scottish solicitor

  • About us

    • About us

    • Contact us

    • Who we are

    • Our strategy, reports and plans

    • Help and advice

    • Our standards

    • Work with us

    • Our logo and branding

    • Equality and diversity

  1. Home
  2. News and events
  3. Blogs & opinions
  4. Letter: Cycling priorities

Letter: Cycling priorities

9th July 2013 | reparation

I refer to the opinion article by Brenda Mitchell (Journal, May 2013, 5) advocating “strict liability” when a cyclist is injured by a motor vehicle and when a pedestrian is injured by a cyclist, claiming that “the UK is currently one of only a small number of countries in Europe that does not operate a system of strict liability for road users”.

I strongly maintain that the UK is not in a position to adopt such strict liability legislation until huge improvements to infrastructure have been put in place.

In the Netherlands, Germany and indeed Denmark, to name but three, urban road layouts have dedicated routes for motor vehicles, dedicated routes for cyclists and dedicated routes for pedestrians, including priority layouts at junctions and roundabouts.

In the UK, the usual “cycle route” comprises faded paint lines on either side of the roadway, where the road is wide enough, and in South Ayrshire for instance, if the carriageway is too narrow, a painted depiction of a bicycle appears at the sides of the roadway, at sporadic intervals.

Such cycle lanes suddenly stop without any alternative route being suggested and, alarmingly, no action is taken to prevent cars from parking in them.

The result is that cyclists use the pavements, thus prejudicing the safety of pedestrians, or, alternatively, have to take their chances on the public roadway.

Until proper demarcation, as in the countries referred to, it would be utter madness to change Scots civil law to introduce strict liability. Cycle Law Scotland and its allies would be far more realistic in their attitude if they lobbied for that. Only after implementation thereof would it be reasonable to consider introducing of strict liability.

In the meantime, all motorists, cyclists and pedestrians should be trained to exercise consideration and compassion for all other road users, and the law applied against all those who fail to do so.

George A Hay, D & J Dunlop, Ayr
 
Add To Favorites
Law Society of Scotland
Atria One, 144 Morrison Street
Edinburgh
EH3 8EX
If you’re looking for a solicitor, visit FindaSolicitor.scot
T: +44(0) 131 226 7411
E: lawscot@lawscot.org.uk
About us
  • Contact us
  • Who we are
  • Strategy reports plans
  • Help and advice
  • Our standards
  • Work with us
Useful links
  • Find a Solicitor
  • Sign in
  • CPD & Training
  • Rules and guidance
  • Website terms and conditions
Law Society of Scotland | © 2025
Made by Gecko Agency Limited