Many people are familiar with this situation, whether on a bike or on foot: Two people try to avoid each other but keep veering in the same direction until, at the last moment, they finally manage to pass one another.

A mountain biker described the accident in much the same way. However, the hiker on a downhill forest road in Saxony-Anhalt did not see him coming, as he was approaching her and her partner from behind. Nevertheless, she is said to have changed sides several times to let him pass. The cyclist reduced his speed to 25 km/h and steered toward the right side of the road, where the woman was ultimately heading as well. A collision occurred, and the cyclist was seriously injured, according to the magazine versicherungsjournal.de’s report on the court case.

The mountain biker sued the pedestrian, claiming she caused him to fall. He also stated that he had drawn the couple’s attention to himself by shouting. Next to the Forststarasse—which is open to bicycles and even cars—there is a hiking trail on which the pedestrians should have been walking. Given the possibility of traffic at any time, she and her companion should not have been walking in the middle of the road.

In court, the mountain biker described himself as a very experienced cyclist; he had participated in professional races and had already covered over 350,000 kilometers on his bike in his lifetime.

Court: 25 km/h Is Too Fast

In court, the parties could not agree on how the collision occurred. “The exact circumstances surrounding the collision between the plaintiff and the defendant could not be clarified,” the ruling states. Walking in the middle of a forest road open to motorized traffic is not objectionable when traffic volume is low, and using the nearby hiking trail is not mandatory.

The Higher Regional Court of Saxony-Anhalt, acting as the appellate court, placed full responsibility on the mountain biker. Given his extensive experience, the cyclist should have known that such complications can arise when passing pedestrians. A speed of 25 km/h is far too fast to pass a person who, according to his own account, had shown signs of being unsettled. The only appropriate speed would have been one at which he could have stopped in time under any circumstances.

The court did not even rule out the possibility that the pedestrian might have acted negligently. However, the mountain biker’s misconduct carried much greater weight. According to the court’s ruling, he is therefore not entitled to any damages and must also bear his own attorney’s fees.