Lowdon v Jumpzone Leisure UK Ltd

Lowdon v Jumpzone Leisure UK Ltd

The risk of injury to the neck was a foreseeable consequence of launching a customer without warning when unprepared, and the trial judge was entitled to award damages above the guideline bracket to reflect the particular loss of amenity suffered by the claimant.

Parties
Appellant/claimant: Jason Lowdon; Respondent/defendant: Jumpzone Leisure UK Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 June 2015
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Trial Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Negligence, Foreseeability, Damages, Loss of Amenity
Tort Law Personal Injury Negligence Foreseeability Damages Loss of Amenity

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jason Lowdon

Appellant/claimant

Jumpzone Leisure UK Limited

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Trial Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether it was reasonably foreseeable that injury would be caused by launching a customer on the Hyper Jump ride without warning
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge erred in awarding damages above the Judicial College Guidelines bracket for loss of amenity, specifically for loss of use of a car

Ratio Decidendi

The risk of injury to the neck was a foreseeable consequence of launching a customer without warning when unprepared, and the trial judge was entitled to award damages above the guideline bracket to reflect the particular loss of amenity suffered by the claimant.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal against liability is dismissed.
  • The appeal against quantum is dismissed.