What about cars E, F and G also darting up the inside lane when C and D slow down…you could imagine D wanting to close the gap to try to prevent such cars cutting in…so partly his fault for being too close but mainly C’s fault for braking for no good reason…the judgement sounds about right to me. Always seemed to me that the law saying the car behind was always at fault was just a convenient way of sorting out insurance claims in multi-car pile-ups… Just say there are four cars driving with two car lengths between them and the first car slams on the anchors for no reason…the third car is going to have less time to react then the second and the forth less time than the third…I don’t know but I assume the law still wouldn’t take all that into account.