ACT Is a pedestrian a pedestrian if he/she is standing still?
- Thread starter mark john conley
- Start date
Different pieces of legislation can have different definitions.
What is the purpose of your enquiry?
What is the purpose of your enquiry?
Thanks Rod, I get upset with oncoming bicyclists on footpaths that 'overtake' oncoming pedestrians without giving way to pedestrians moving in the opposite direction.
To protest their actions I stand still on the left hand side of the 'hot spot' footpaths only moving to not impede pedestrians. A cyclist has accused me of illegally blocking 'footpath traffic'.
Am I?
To protest their actions I stand still on the left hand side of the 'hot spot' footpaths only moving to not impede pedestrians. A cyclist has accused me of illegally blocking 'footpath traffic'.
Am I?
I would say it includes a person standing still, for the following reasons:
- The Road Transport (Safety and Traffic Management) Regulation 2000 (ACT), for example, does not actually define what a pedestrian is.
- It does, however, in section 8A state "a pedestrian includes ... a person in a non-motorised wheechair ... a person in or on a wheeled recreational device or wheeled toy ... a person in or on a personal mobility device."
- The key point is the use of the terms "in" and "in or on", and the lack of anything that says you have to be moving.
- The Road Transport (Safety and Traffic Management) Regulation 2000 (ACT), for example, does not actually define what a pedestrian is.
- It does, however, in section 8A state "a pedestrian includes ... a person in a non-motorised wheechair ... a person in or on a wheeled recreational device or wheeled toy ... a person in or on a personal mobility device."
- The key point is the use of the terms "in" and "in or on", and the lack of anything that says you have to be moving.
I'd say you are a pedestrian.
Standing stationary on the left margin while others pass can be considered a safety measure. It means you avoid moving into the path of someone travelling faster than you and they can take whatever action they need knowing you are stationary. Kids and dogs are the biggest problem for cyclists because they are unpredictable. A stationary pedestrian is very predictable
But lying stationary across a path would not be considered a safety measure, nor would standing in the middle of the path.
Standing stationary on the left margin while others pass can be considered a safety measure. It means you avoid moving into the path of someone travelling faster than you and they can take whatever action they need knowing you are stationary. Kids and dogs are the biggest problem for cyclists because they are unpredictable. A stationary pedestrian is very predictable
But lying stationary across a path would not be considered a safety measure, nor would standing in the middle of the path.
thankyou Rob and Rod, i am a pedestrian, a cyclist, and a driver and there's irresponsible members of all three 'out there'. I won't be prostrate nor in the middle. All the best, mark
That is an interesting question, I suppose another side of it is if someone is not moving, if they are not a pedestrian, what are they? In the absence of a definition in the legislation Courts sometimes look to a dictionary definition which defines a pedestrian as "as a person travelling by foot". Combine that with section 8A as mentioned by Rob I think you have a fairly good definition of a pedestrian. So yes, I think if someone is on a footpath and stationary, they are still a pedestrian.
In the NSW road rules (which I think are fairly uniform across the country), Rule 236 (2) states "A pedestrian must not unreasonably obstruct the path of any driver or another pedestrian." (note that rule 19 says that references to "driver" includes a "rider")
I'm not a lawyer, but I would consider that if you stopped briefly to allow other pedestrians and riders to pass safely then that would be reasonable, but if you were to stand for a while in a "hot spot" with the intention that your presence will force riders to slow down to get around you then that would be unreasonable. I can't see how you would not be considered a pedestrian when standing still, particularly as rule 236 (4) talks about pedestrians not being allowed to "stand" on a road in certain circumstances.
There is no provision in the rules for an exemption when you wish to "protest", and indeed any protest would likely affect all cyclists, not just the ones whose behaviour offends you.
I'm not a lawyer, but I would consider that if you stopped briefly to allow other pedestrians and riders to pass safely then that would be reasonable, but if you were to stand for a while in a "hot spot" with the intention that your presence will force riders to slow down to get around you then that would be unreasonable. I can't see how you would not be considered a pedestrian when standing still, particularly as rule 236 (4) talks about pedestrians not being allowed to "stand" on a road in certain circumstances.
There is no provision in the rules for an exemption when you wish to "protest", and indeed any protest would likely affect all cyclists, not just the ones whose behaviour offends you.
Last edited:
This reminds me of the issue of pedestrians standing near crossings and your in an approaching car. Obviously you slow down and be prepared to stop, but what happens when the pedestrian suddenly decided to cross just as your going through the crossing? Any policeman will book you for sure, but i don't know what you could have done about it?
clancy, i think arr's state vehicles must give way to pedestrians ON a pedestrian crossing
interestingly they also state for children's crossings vehicles must give way to pedestrians APPROACHING the crossing
all the best, mark
Similar threads
