Now, apply HTA 140 to that scenario...
-Bike should have slowed as to not pass lead car's leading edge. Thus allowing more time to judge situation. Also lead car with better view would have hit the cop first if lead car chose to proceed through intersection. Lead car, with clear view chose NOT to proceed throught amber.
-Common sense and law says following vehicle should have slowed and then STOPPED so as to not pass leading edge of leading car.
-Bike failed to check intersection was safe to proceed on amber by directly disobeying 140 as was applicable here.
-Lead vehicle was NOT signalling left, which means the bike did NOT have the entitlement to pass on the right (within 30m of the intersection).
150. (1) The driver of a motor vehicle may overtake and pass to the right of another vehicle only where the movement can be made in safety and,
(a) the vehicle overtaken is making or about to make a left turn or its driver has signalled his or her intention to make a left turn;
(b) is made on a highway with unobstructed pavement of sufficient width for two or more lines of vehicles in each direction; or
(c) is made on a highway designated for the use of one-way traffic only. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 150 (1).
150 allows 2 (applicable exceptions to 140):
a) the lead vehicle is signalling a left turn or,
b) There is sufficient width to pass (regardless of left turn indication) however,
either of those 2 exceptions must be in conjunction with "only where the movement can be made in safety".
So:
1) first and foremost 140 applies, i.e. don't pass the leading edge of the lead (approaching) vehicle within 30m of an intersection. Was this done by the biker? No.
2) if the lead vehicle was stopped the biker was to first stop then ascertain if it was safe to continue. Was this done by the biker? No.
3) did the biker have a right to pass the left vehicle? Since there was sufficient width he has part of the requirement to do so, but the second requirement (was it safe), was not met, so the biker did NOT have the right to pass the lead left most vehicle if indeed the lead vehicle was stopped.
4) For those who mentioned that 140 doesn't allow passing of a left vehicle who is stopped at an intersection (to turn left), 150 allows for this pass as long as their signal is indicating it and it is safe to do so. However an interesting point then ocurs....does one need to stop before passing a lead vehicle, turning left, stopped at an intersection.
According to this reading of 140 and 150, technically everyone passing a left turning vehicle which is stopped within 30m of an intersection should first come to a stop. This is of course absurd, so the point is then, what steps can the biker have taken to enure that the intersection was safe?
Paul makes an interesting point here. Despite 140, every car cannot be expected to stop beside another stopped car at an intersection, but Paul brings this point up in relation to a stopped vehicle to the left at an intersection which is about to turn left.
Instead in this case we have a situation where the lead car is was just plain stopped, not turning left, not indicating left, just stopped at an amber. This would send warning signs to any trailing vehicle. What then did the biker do (assuming that 140 is too confusing and rarely applied) to check the intersection was safe? Did the biker slow down at least, then proceed through? Did he accelerate to make the light?
From the cop side of things, was he first stopped, having checked the intersection for safety? Or did he just flow through the intersection not stopping at all? If he at least did a check, then the cop seems to have trumped the biker already. Another rule that no one follows, is that you are not supposed to enter the intersection at all, unless it is clear to proceed through. Technically no left turns should be made from the middle of the intersection, but should be made from the line at the start of the intersection. But we all know this is never done. Instead 3 cars line up in the middle of the intersection with no room to reverse, and get hung out on the amber, then most of the time they even proceed on the red, cause of all the other oncoming cars that rush the yellow.
So, more than likely the cop did 2 checks....1 when he entered the intersection after having stopped (assumed), then slowly crept through, reasonably thinking it was clear to proceed through. The second check was to note the lead oncoming car stopped. Did he check a 3rd and final time for the right oncoming lane? Maybe not.....but then again as I mentioned before no one properly makes left turns in one fluid smooth clear motion from the start of the intersection. Everyone creeps through and stops in the middle. It could be argued that creeping is a form of checking safety progressively. So we can't really fault the cop here.
Had the biker slowed, and maybe even breached 140 by not stopping, due to the conflict between 140 and 150 and the fact that noooooooooo one observes that law, did the biker at least slow and creep through the intersection in the manner the cop did?
Both biker and cop seemed to have followed common practice for driving rather than follow the rules in perfect (impractical) detail. But in doing so did the biker, or can the biker prove he perfomed sufficient safety checks? If so what were they?
