Appeal court overturns bouncy castle decision

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.”