A was crossing a two-lane provincial road at a point that was not a designated pedestrian crossing. B, driving his pick-up truck along the same road, spotted A from approximately 60 meters away. Despite having ample time and distance to reduce his speed, B assumed A would finish crossing before the truck reached her and maintained his speed. A stumbled and was unable to clear the lane in time. B's truck struck A, causing her to suffer multiple fractures and other serious injuries requiring hospitalization. B denied civil liability, arguing that A's own negligence in crossing outside a pedestrian lane was the proximate cause of her injuries and that he should bear no responsibility for the resulting harm. Is B correct? (Bar 2026 Syllabus)