header-logo header-logo

07 August 2008
Issue: 7333 / Categories: Legal News , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

Appeal court overturns bouncy castle decision

Legal news

The Court of Appeal decision that a couple who hired a bouncy castle were not liable for an accident that left a boy brain-damaged is a robust one, lawyers say.

Catherine and Timothy Perry faced a £1m compensation payout after the High Court ruled they had not adequately supervised Sam Harris who suffered brain-damage after another boy somersaulted and struck his forehead. However, the appeal court said Sam’s injuries were caused by “a freak and tragic accident” which occurred without fault.

Philip Mot t QC, of Outer Temple Chambers, says this was a “robust decision” which will be welcomed by those “who fear that the compensation culture has gone so far that children can no longer be allowed to enjoy themselves”.

Andrew Underwood, head of large loss at Keoghs, who acted for the Perrys says: “The appeal court stressed that the level of supervision to be expected of parents must match the level of risk associated with the activity in question. One cannot rule out risk from all activities. In this case the expected risk of injury associated with bouncy castles was not a risk of serious harm, as in fact, tragically, arose.”

Issue: 7333 / Categories: Legal News , Personal injury
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll