Official meaning for flashing amber filter light

trellheim

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119637773#Comment_119637773

But isnt it a bike lane in both cases and so you have to give way in both cases if there's a bike there .... I can't see the difference here

GM228

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119640610#Comment_119640610

Well yes, as I described in my earlier post, but my reply was in relation to what was the difference between a solid lit green and flashing amber.

It could be argued in the courts that S10 (5)(b)(i) of the Road Traffic (Traffic and Parking) Regulations 1997 as amended does indeed trump the common law requirements of yielding right away when entering a lane under the principles of pass and repass, but I'm not certain such a position would be held, it could even be considered a regulation which is ultra vires - but that's not the discussion for here, ultimately that would be a decision for the Superior Courts, but where the flashing amber is provided that is a positive regulation which is very specific and the motorist turning left must yield to the cyclist going straight.

Spook_ie

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119643761#Comment_119643761

But does not then all regulations passed since 1888 go against the right for anyone, including the motorist to "pass and repass without hinderence"

However, under common law S8 (8) of the Road Traffic (Traffic and Parking) Regulations, 1997 has a far broader application, this common law position dates back to the Ex parte Lewis (1888) 21 Q.B.D. 191 case (and even further to time immemorial) and the legal principles of pass and repass on a public highway (which for those who do not know is the common law basis for the right of use and enjoyment of public roads), the legal description of pass and repass was determined in 1888 and held to be a "right for all Her Majesty's subjects at all seasons of the year freely and at their will to pass and repass without let or hindrance" 

A cyclist overtaking on the left when a vehicle is performing the manouvre stated in SI332 of 2012 is most definately being hindered by the cyclist if the cyclist is given carte blanche to overtake on the left.

trellheim

 but where the flashing amber is provided that is a positive regulation which is very specific and the motorist turning left must yield to the cyclist going straight.

this is extremely confusing if you view it in the negative , if there's no flashing amber you don't give way ( but its a bike lane so you should be giving way anyway ? )

don't even get me started on the truly horrendous and dangerous new flashing amber at Bride St/Bride Rd https://www.google.com/maps/@53.3413148,-6.2700904,3a,75y,334.35h,89.89t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1spocNXr_tbIYCaoxJZIw-OQ!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DpocNXr_tbIYCaoxJZIw-OQ%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D72.626274%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

really dangerous for cyclists northbound across both sides as the flashing amber looks like its there for pedestrians

GM228

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119644620#Comment_119644620

But does not then all regulations passed since 1888 go against the right for anyone, including the motorist to "pass and repass without hinderence"

We are talking here about the basis of yielding to traffic already lawfully present on the highway which stems from the right to pass and repass without hinderence, it is long settled that there are many aspects to pass and repass which can be lawfully amended or restricted, or indeed reaffirmed, one such right so often reaffirmed is that a vehicle entering another lane must yield the right of way to any other vehicle already in that lane.

A cyclist overtaking on the left when a vehicle is performing the manouvre stated in SI332 of 2012 is most definately being hindered by the cyclist if the cyclist is given carte blanche to overtake on the left.

Forget about left or right for one moment and just concentrate on two lanes and two vehicles, one of those vehicles turns into or crosses the path of the other forcing that other vehicle to slow down or brake or even cause a collission - who do you think is the hinderence?

There are various reasons under the rules of statutory interpretation why the amendments from 2012 are limited in their scope and can not trump other provisions of law relating to cyclists in a cycle track, and it is long accepted in law and convention that you must yield to a vehicle already present in another lane, expecting a cyclist to yield to another vehicle who enters their lane goes against the common law and international law.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119645996#Comment_119645996

this is extremely confusing if you view it in the negative , if there's no flashing amber you don't give way ( but its a bike lane so you should be giving way anyway ? )

It's not really that confusing, put it this way, if there is a cycle track and you are crossing it to to left you must yield right of way irrespective of there being a flashing light or not.

don't even get me started on the truly horrendous and dangerous new flashing amber at Bride St/Bride Rde

really dangerous for cyclists northbound across both sides as the flashing amber looks like its there for pedestrians

But this is a little different than we have been discussing due to the layout of the junction where there are independent cyclist traffic lights which provide the cyclist with a red whilst the motorist has the flashing amber - the flashing amber in this case to allow priority for traffic coming from the opposite direction which is turning right.

standardg60

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119644620#Comment_119644620

If you're changing lanes the emphasis is on you not to be the hindrance.

When you're turning right you don't consider oncoming traffic to be a hindrance to your progress do you?

Turning left requires the same consideration to be given to traffic on your left.

standardg60

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119645996#Comment_119645996

A green left arrow never gave a right to proceed over cyclists on the left travelling straight ahead.

The flashing amber is being introduced now because some drivers who've never cycled don't seem to be able to comprehend this.

trellheim

its absolutely confusing folks for me. I cannot see what extra value the flashing amber brings . it just makes you think something else is in play that you are missing

kirving

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119648234#Comment_119648234

When designing any critical safety instruction, human perception, reaction, standardisation and empirical knowledge tends to trump legal (and technical) definitions.

Until recently, flashing amber was used almost exclusively to refer oncoming traffic, or traffic on the road which you were joining, had priority. Now, at some junctions, it's primary purpose is to indicate priority for cyclists (which they always had anyway) but in fact can draw a motorists attention to where they normally used to look (to the right) when they see a flashing amber left arrow.

The below might be a little out of date, but it's what most people learned to drive against, and calls out "other road", and "traffic approaching from the right". It's not that the flashing amber is wrong, but it is a change nonetheless, and I think the unintended consequence until a more widespread rollout happens, will to be to encourage drivers to focus more on what's coming from the right, while at the same time enforcing cyclists view that they have priority over the vehicle have right of way to cross their path. (which is correct, but the cyclist is also not supposed to overtake a vehicle turning left)

https://www.garda.ie/en/crime/traffic-matters/rules_of_the_road.pdf

standardg60

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119650936#Comment_119650936

Yep that could do with updating alright.

I think the change is more with placing the flashing amber at normal junctions, rather than where you normally see them at a slip road, where you'd be out of the way of a cyclist travelling straight on.

So if you see one at a normal junction now, the something else at play is there's probably a cycle lane on your left.

In fairness to people who might find it confusing they could really do with advertising the change a bit better.

GM228

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119650936#Comment_119650936

but the cyclist is also not supposed to overtake a vehicle turning left

As someone who specialises in law (particularly traffic law) and statutory interpretation I can tell you this is not entirely correct and depends very much on the road layout and provision of lanes, traffic lights etc.

A vague provision in law will not trump a specific positive provision in law, a thing to remember is that the Road Traffic (Traffic and Parking) Regulations 1997 is a penal statue, as such it's application must be strictly construed, where there are vague provisions which for example contradict international law or there are more specific provisions within the same statute itself than those must prevail over the vague provision, there's a massive body of case law on this from the Superior Courts and these principles of statutory interpretation are long settled.

The same statute makes it very clear that where a flashing amber light is provided that the vehicle turning left must make an unqualified yield right of way to any traffic already on the major road, I say unqualified because where these lights are provided the yield right of way provision is not qualified by the direction of traffic or the position of such traffic. The provision of a cyclist not overtaking on the left realistically can only apply where there are no lanes or flashing amber filter lights, otherwise it creates an ambiguity and fails a number of statutory interpretation rules and can't be read in conjunction with the rest of the Regulation.

Under common law and international law it is long recognised that cycle tracks are lanes and that you must yield to traffic in another lane.

As an aside newer international law (one to which Ireland is not a party to mind you) has expanded on the above and gone a little further and gives a specific example that a cycle overtaking on the left must have priority over a vehicle turning left at a junction. It has simply codified the international legal order of so many states and their common law or civil law legal systems.

trellheim

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119651230#Comment_119651230

you've just taken 5 paragraphs there to try and explain an extremely confusing thing, and I am no wiser.

I'm not trying to be negative, but it genuinely does not make sense, either here in the RoTR

As an aside , what does "overtaking" mean , how far back does the cyclist need to be , I find it extremely difficult to judge deliveroo e-bike speeds as they may be going at a very fast clip ( to take one example )

I told ya

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119654718#Comment_119654718

Try and make sense of the BE licence.