21 November, 2019
The Claimant brought a claim for personal injury after riding the dodgems at the Defendant's fairground attraction.
The Claimant alleged that whilst on the dodgems, she was struck by another car driven by her cousin. She argued that as a result of the impact, she was propelled forwards and hit her knee on a protruding bolt located on the underside of the steering column. The Claimant sustained two lacerations and sought damages for scarring and psychological damage.
The Defendant denied that there was a protruding bolt located within the car, which could have caused the injuries claimed by the Claimant. The ride was inspected by the operator daily and by an external inspector on an annual basis and no issues had been found with the car in question.
The witnesses for the Defendant described at trial that the accident had occurred because the Claimant had removed her seatbelt and moved to a standing position when the ride was still in operation. Another car struck her and as a result, she fell over the steering wheel and injured herself. She had acted in contravention of the Defendant's instruction to remain seated.
At trial, the Judge found the Claimant's evidence to be confused and contradictory. He concluded that that the Defendant had done all it could to discharge its duty of care and dismissed the claim.
We are delighted with the successful outcome of this case. The Defendant produced detailed evidence at trial including photographic and video evidence to confirm that there were no protruding bolts and nothing untoward about the dodgem car at all. The compelling evidence satisfied the Court that it was impossible for the Claimant to have struck her knee on any part of the steering column or otherwise whilst seated.