TWO bike riders who were involved in a serious collision on a cycle path were found to be equally to blame by a judge.

Nigel Dick and Joseph Merrick were both injured after they collided at a junction on National Cycle Route (NCR)7 and NCR75 between Linwood and Johnstone on August 26, 2019.

Mr Dick, 54, was cycling home to Lochwinnoch from his work as a senior control engineer in Renfrew when the accident occurred.

He was seriously injured and passed out and was later told that his heart stopped and he required resuscitation.

Mr Dick raised an action at Scotland's highest civil court, the Court of Session in Edinburgh, seeking damages from fellow cyclist Mr Merrick.

Retired schoolteacher Mr Merrick, 66, travelled to Glengarnock to work as a supply teacher on the day of the incident and was returning to his home in Anniesland at the time of the incident.

The action was called before judge Lord Sandison to decide who was at fault in causing the accident and to apportion blame if both were at fault.

Lawyers for Mr Dick argued that Mr Merrick should be held as 75% to blame while his counsel submitted that the claim against him should be dismissed.

Lord Sandison said the main factors in the accident were the speed of both riders and their failure to maintain an adequate lookout as they approached the junction.

The judge said: "I do not find it possible to conclude that the fault of either contributed more to the causation of the accident and its consequences than the fault of the other, or that one was more blameworthy than the other.

"Each was travelling at about twice the safe speed for him and each completely failed, for no good reason, to take the steps necessary to observe the presence of the other until the collision was inevitable.

"Neither had any priority over the other, and the responsibility to take reasonable care for the safety of himself and others was equally incumbent on each."

Lord Sandison said he found that Mr Merrick's fault materially contributed to the loss, injury and damage sustained by Mr Dick but that in the circumstances he considered it "just and equitable" to hold Mr Dick 50% responsible.

The judge said it was important to appreciate that national cycle paths were not roads.

"They are simply paths, open to cyclists as well as anyone else who wishes to use them other than by way of motorised vehicles, be that pedestrians, children on scooters, teenagers on skateboards or mothers pushing prams," he said.

"Their users can be young or old, nimble or lumbering, able to see and hear well or not, alert to their surroundings or lost in their favourite music or a podcast on their headphones.

"Pedestrians occupy no lesser place in the hierarchy of users than cyclists. Every user must respect the interests of every other user."

The judge said the case would be continued to assess the level of damages, if necessary.