McCracken v Smith & Ors [2015] EWCA Civ 380 (22 April 2015)

McCracken v Smith & Ors [2015] EWCA Civ 380 (22 April 2015)

The Court of Appeal held that Daniel McCracken and Damian Smith were engaged in a joint enterprise of dangerous riding, and that Daniel's injuries were caused by his participation in that enterprise. The ex turpi causa defence therefore applied, barring Daniel's recovery against Mr Bell. The judge's findings were unduly generous in distancing Daniel from the dangerous riding. The proper inference was that both boys shared responsibility for the manner in which the bike was ridden, and Daniel's injuries were a direct consequence of the joint criminal activity. The appeal was allowed on the ex turpi causa issue, and Daniel's claim against Mr Bell was dismissed.

Citation
[2015] EWCA Civ 380
Parties
Claimant/1st Respondent: Daniel McCracken (a protected party suing by his mother and litigation friend Deborah Norris); 1st Defendant/2nd Respondent: Damian Smith; 2nd Defendant/3rd Respondent: The Motor Insurers' Bureau; 3rd Defendant/appellant: Darren Michael Bell
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 April 2015
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; Daniel McCracken's claim against Mr Bell dismissed on ex turpi causa grounds.
Legal Topics
Ex Turpi Causa, Joint Enterprise, Negligence, Contributory Negligence, Duty of Care, Public Policy in Tort, Motor Insurance Liability
Tort Law Insurance Law Personal Injury Ex Turpi Causa Joint Enterprise Negligence Contributory Negligence Duty of Care +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Daniel McCracken (a protected party suing by his mother and litigation friend Deborah Norris)

Claimant/1st Respondent

Damian Smith

1st Defendant/2nd Respondent

The Motor Insurers' Bureau

2nd Defendant/3rd Respondent

Darren Michael Bell

3rd Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defence of ex turpi causa bars the claimant's recovery for injuries sustained during joint criminal activity
  2. 2 Whether the claimant and rider were engaged in a joint enterprise of dangerous riding
  3. 3 Whether the claimant's injuries were caused by his own criminal conduct or by the defendant's negligence

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that Daniel McCracken and Damian Smith were engaged in a joint enterprise of dangerous riding, and that Daniel's injuries were caused by his participation in that enterprise. The ex turpi causa defence therefore applied, barring Daniel's recovery against Mr Bell. The judge's findings were unduly generous in distancing Daniel from the dangerous riding. The proper inference was that both boys shared responsibility for the manner in which the bike was ridden, and Daniel's injuries were a direct consequence of the joint criminal activity. The appeal was allowed on the ex turpi causa issue, and Daniel's claim against Mr Bell was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; Daniel McCracken's claim against Mr Bell dismissed on ex turpi causa grounds.

Orders

  • Daniel McCracken's claim against Darren Michael Bell is dismissed.
  • Costs order in favour of Mr Bell against Daniel McCracken.