“Low Velocity Impact Collisions
and Personal Injuries Actions”
Paul Burns S.C.
Low Velocity Impact Collisions
 No Legal Definition
 No Separate Legal Concept
 No Separate Legal Principles Applicable
Typical Case
 Low Velocity Impact Collision
 Defendant accepting negligent driving
 Defendant denying injuries or extent of injuries claimed
by Plaintiff
 Plaintiff’s medical witnesses supportive of Plaintiff’s
contentions re: Injuries
 Defendant engineering evidence and/or medical
evidence contradict Plaintiff’s contention re: Injuries
Weight of Engineering Evidence
 Not necessarily conclusive
 Must be weighed alongside other evidence in the case
 Armstrong v York [2005] EWCA 277
 “We do not have trial by expert in this country; We
have trial by Judge”
Factors which may enhance
weight of engineering evidence
 Photos taken at the scene
 Photos taken shortly afterwards
 Early inspection by motor damage assessor
 Early inspection by engineer
 Eyewitness evidence, e.g. Defendant driver, emergency
services personnel, bystanders
 Medical Evidence
Weight of Medical Evidence
 Must be weighed alongside other evidence
 Likely to be contested
 Interaction with engineering evidence
Factors which may enhance
weight of medical evidence
 Information re: Impact
 Early medical examination
 Medical records pre and post-accident
 Other relevant background/history of Plaintiff
Credibility of Plaintiff
 Crucial factor
 Detailed Notice for Particulars
 Medical Records pre and post-accident
 Claims history
 Surveillance
Conclusion 1
 No special law applicable to low velocity impact
collisions.
 Court not obliged to follow expert evidence if there is
other credible conflicting evidence.
 Expert engineering evidence is of significant
importance.
 Expert medical evidence also of significant importance more information medical expert has re circumstances
of the accident and the Plaintiff’s medical history the
greater will be the medical expert’s ability to give a
reliable opinion in the matter.
Conclusion 2
 Defendants are more likely to succeed in defending low
velocity impact personal injury claims where a multi
faceted approach is adopted e.g. the engineering
evidence has been considered by the medical witness in
addition to other relevant factors.
 Credibility of Plaintiff is crucial and engineering and/or
medical evidence important in assessing credibility as
regards whether the Plaintiff is faking, exaggerating or
misattributing symptoms.