Nice link Brains.

I'm covering for 83 Brits who don't cycle (if the average is 77km per year)

I think we shouldn't get confused about the difference between civil and criminal law.

From what I read this relates to civil actions (i.e claims for compensation) and if it does, I'm not in favour, as it means presumably that insurers will have to prove liability by a cyclist to refute a claim for damages, leading to increased costs all round. However, it may push more cyclists to get insurance and you can decide for yourselves if it's a good idea.

I don't think it will affect criminal actions(i.e in Uk the presumption of innocence until proven guilty) so I'm not sure there'll be more hit and runs.