A POLICE constable from London Colney left facing a lifetime in a wheelchair after a road smash has taken a multi-million pound claim for damages to London's High Court.

Alexander Kotula, 27, of Norris Close, blames poor safety at a roadworks site in St Albans for the accident, which ruined his career and his life.

Mr Kotula was cycling home along Park Street, on September 28, 2006, when he collided with a lorry passing roadworks.

He claims that, whether he was actually cycling or merely pushing his bike, the pedestrian "corridor" alongside the works was too narrow, creating a dangerous situation.

Mr Kotula launched his bid last Thursday at the High Court, where his lawyers began a complex battle for millions of pounds in compensation from three companies.

David Westcott QC claimed EDF Energy Networks Plc, which carried out the work, and contractors, Morrison Utility Services Ltd and Birch Utilities Ltd, are liable to pay damages.

All three companies deny breaching a duty of care and are hotly contesting Mr Kotula's claim in a court battle, which has raged for six days.

The firms claim that Mr Kotula was cycling on the pavement and, therefore, they did not owe him a duty of care. It was the quality of that cycling which caused the accident, they say.

Mr Kotula, who suffered post traumatic amnesia, denies riding the bike along the corridor through the works, but says that, even if he was, the companies were under an obligation to make sure it was safe.

Mr Westcott told Judge Simon Brown QC that the corridor alongside the works, protected from the traffic by barriers, was too narrow and obstructed at one point by a wooden post.

The post, which was removed after the accident, would have forced people using the corridor to deviate closer to the edge of the road where traffic was passing, he said.

Just a little more room could have prevented the accident and the terrible injuries which Mr Kotula sustained, the hearing was told.

"What is evident is that Mr Kotula was really only clipped by the lorry - with devastating consequences - and, if that half metre had been available, he would not," the QC said.

The young PC admitted he would have been wrong to ride on the pavement - if, indeed, he had been - but it would have been only to avoid the dangers present on that particular road.

"Even if he was cycling, he was within the scope of the duty of care," Mr Westcott continued.

"Lawfulness is not the issue, foreseeability is. We will say that cyclists were plainly foreseeable.

"It is increasingly common, we say, for cyclists to use pavements, for fear of injury on the roads.

"The real hazard from using bicycles on pavements is when the cycling is inconsiderate.

"It is not only understandable, but foreseeable, that, in times when roads are busy and dangerous, cyclists will, indeed, use the pavements."

A judgement on the case was due as the Review went to press.