[26] And, in relation to cyclists, the learned author has the following to say 4: “A driver is expected to keep a proper lookout for cyclists. It is difficult to ride a bicycle in such a manner that it remains precisely and securely on a fixed course. There is always a degree of sideways movement - first to the one side and then to the other. If the cyclist is a young child and in addition there is a strong wind blowing, the possibility that a bicycle may deviate considerable more than normally from its course is greater. For the aforementioned reasons a driver in such a case is expected to give a cyclist timeous warning of his/her approach and in his/her judgment will, in addition, also leave sufficient space between him/her and the bicycle in order to be able to overtake with reasonable safety. ” While the Plaintiff is obviously not a young child, he is a slightly built person of about 1,6m in height and weighing only 55 kilogram. He certainly would have been pushed around by the following wind and would have been less stable on his bicycle than a taller and heavier person. [27] In Henry v SANTAM Ins Co Ltd 5 Watermeyer J noted that: “The legal principles are dear that a motorist overtaking a two wheeled vehicle, such as a cycle or a scooter, must allow a sufficient clearance between the two vehicles making due allowance for some lateral movement on the part of the rider of the two-wheeled vehicle, and this would be especially so where the road surface is rough, as it was at the place of the collision. ” Well done PPA! The prosecutor, with their case load, will need all the assistance from counsel.
