Corbett v Cumbria Kart Racing Club & Ors [2013] EWHC 1362 (QB) (22 May 2013)

Corbett v Cumbria Kart Racing Club & Ors [2013] EWHC 1362 (QB) (22 May 2013)

The defendants breached their duty of care by failing to foresee and prevent the risk of a vehicle leaving the track and colliding with the inadequately protected ambulance. The claimant's head injury was caused by impact with the ambulance, not the tyre barrier. The presence and position of the ambulance behind an inadequate tyre barrier created a foreseeable and preventable risk of serious injury to participants, amounting to negligence under both common law and the Occupiers Liability Act 1957.

Citation
[2013] EWHC 1362 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Peter Corbett (by his Wife and Litigation Friend Anita Corbett); First Defendant: Cumbria Kart Racing Club; Second Defendant: Tracksport Challenge Limited; Third Defendant (discontinued): RAC Motor Sports Association Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 May 2013
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury Claim / Trial on Preliminary Issues of Causation and Liability
Outcome
Liability established against the first and second defendants; claim against third defendant discontinued.
Legal Topics
Negligence, Duty of Care, Causation, Foreseeability, Occupiers Liability Act 1957, Motor Sports Liability
Tort Law Personal Injury Occupiers' Liability Negligence Duty of Care Causation Foreseeability Occupiers Liability Act 1957 +1 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 1 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peter Corbett (by his Wife and Litigation Friend Anita Corbett)

Claimant

Cumbria Kart Racing Club

First Defendant

Tracksport Challenge Limited

Second Defendant

RAC Motor Sports Association Ltd

Third Defendant (discontinued)

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury Claim / Trial on Preliminary Issues of Causation and Liability

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants breached their duty of care to the claimant under common law and the Occupiers Liability Act 1957
  2. 2 Whether the accident and resulting injury were foreseeable and preventable
  3. 3 Whether the claimant's head injury was caused by impact with the ambulance or by passing through the tyre barrier

Ratio Decidendi

The defendants breached their duty of care by failing to foresee and prevent the risk of a vehicle leaving the track and colliding with the inadequately protected ambulance. The claimant's head injury was caused by impact with the ambulance, not the tyre barrier. The presence and position of the ambulance behind an inadequate tyre barrier created a foreseeable and preventable risk of serious injury to participants, amounting to negligence under both common law and the Occupiers Liability Act 1957.

Court Disposition

Liability established against the first and second defendants; claim against third defendant discontinued.

Orders

  • Judgment for the claimant on preliminary issues of causation and liability.
  • Assessment of damages to be determined at a later stage.