Facts
On May 12, 1974, Mrs. [Y.] was driving her car from Laupen to Gurmels and intended to turn left to enter a forest road. While she was driving at 35-40 km/h, Mr. X., who was following her, attempted to overtake at approximately 90-100 km/h. When Mr. X. reached the level of Mrs. Y.'s vehicle, she activated her left turn signal and began to move to the left. Mr. X. then braked urgently, then released the brakes in the hope of being able to pass to the left of Mrs. Y.'s vehicle, but the collision occurred.
On November 11, 1974, Mrs. [Y.] was sanctioned for violating Art. 34 para. 3 RTA, while Mr. X. was convicted for a violation of Art. 35 para. 3 RTA. Mr. X. filed an appeal for nullity against this decision.
Considerations
The Federal Tribunal considers that the fact that Mrs. [Y.] had braked twice on the right lane did not constitute a concrete indication that she was about to turn left suddenly. Mr. X. was therefore entitled to assume that she would let him overtake, as she had done with another vehicle shortly before.
When Mrs. [Y.] activated her turn signal and moved to the left, Mr. X. immediately braked urgently, then released the brakes in the hope of being able to pass to the left. Although Mr. X. should have perceived Mrs. Y.'s intention to turn earlier, he would in any case not have been able to avoid the collision, even by braking continuously. Furthermore, a warning signal would not have prevented the accident given the short distance and the significant speed difference between the two…