Description
Proof:- On 7 October 2007 the pursuer was driving his car on the M8 towards the Kingston Bridge in Glasgow. The pursuer slowed down to take heed of queuing traffic, and was close to stopping, when he was hit from behind by a van driven by the defender. The pursuer came to a halt and was again struck by the defender's van, pushing him into the rear of the car in front of him being driven by a Mr Cassidy which resulted in a scuff on his car's rear bumper. The second contact between pursuer and defender was caused by the defender being struck by a vehicle from behind, the driver of which remains untraced. At proof the dispute between pursuer and defender concerned the sequence of events and the reason for the defender's car colliding with the pursuer's car. The pursuer claimed that it happened because the defender failed to stop in time when the pursuer slowed down due to traffic in front of him and he described there being two impacts. The defender claimed that he had stopped his van and that the untraced fourth driver collided with him, propelling him into the pursuer and therefore absolving him of blame. Here the court considered whether the pursuer had proved that the accident happened in the manner he described and that there was loss, injury and damage sustained by him, due to the fault of the defender, and the quantification of any award made.
