The pedestrian whatever in safety vest is responsible for all the times when crossing the road in sudden and unpredictable way or when walking on the wrong side of the road.
When you invest a pedestrian with a car is always the fear that the fault of the motorist, regardless of the conduct of the loop. In fact, although it is more difficult for the driver to demonstrate their lack of responsibility than the person invested, it does not. There are numerous cases where the fault is not of the driver. When crossing the street, everything depends on how sudden and unpredictable was the conduct of the pedestrian. To this end, however, it will be better to refer to our guides when the pedestrian hit is right and when the pedestrian has invested no reason.
But here we will deal with the case where the pedestrian walk along the wrong side of the road, thus constituting a danger to him and for motorists, not seeing him, they risk going to crash. But we proceed with order and, before understanding whether, when invested pedestrian, is always the fault of the driver, an example.
Imagine walking on the sides of a road without sidewalks. It is evening and the lighting is not the best, but we have no way to get home. We are heading in the same direction of vehicle operating conditions, taking care to be well matched to the margins, when a car, which is running at speed, hits us giving us a break. Still sore intimidator driver we ask adequate compensation, but the driver of the car blocking the controversy in the bud, our presence at the sides of the road was "unpredictable" and that we not wearing reflective clothing and being - in fact - in the street, even the absence of the sidewalk, the same could not avoid the event. We do note the speed was excessive and that, if he went slower, would still have to brake. But he resists and it is an argument. Who is right?
What believes it is not entirely responsible for the incident? Or are we? What we believe we have the right to compensation? The solution was provided recently by the Court of Turin.
According to the judgment in question, it is not responsible for investing the car that hits the pedestrian, though the latter was walking on the side of a road without a sidewalk, with no reflective vest and in the same direction of vehicle travel. The pedestrian, in fact, has the ' obligation to circulate in the opposite direction to the running direction.
So if we invest, as we walk on foot on a street with no sidewalks and in the same direction of travel of the car, the driver cannot be held responsible.