Uren v Corporate Leisure (UK) Ltd & Anor [2013] EWHC 353 (QB) (26 February 2013)

Uren v Corporate Leisure (UK) Ltd & Anor [2013] EWHC 353 (QB) (26 February 2013)

Both Defendants failed to carry out adequate risk assessments for the pool game, specifically failing to consider the risk of headfirst entry into the pool. The risk of serious injury was foreseeable and unacceptable given the competitive nature and physical setup of the game. Liability is established against both Defendants for breach of duty.

Citation
[2013] EWHC 353 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Robert Lee Uren; First Defendant: Corporate Leisure (UK) Limited; Second Defendant: Ministry of Defence
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 February 2013
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury / Re Trial Following Court of Appeal Remittal
Outcome
Liability established against both Defendants; apportionment of liability not determined at this trial.
Legal Topics
Risk Assessment, Duty of Care, Non Delegable Duty, Causation, Recreational Activities, Health and Safety
Tort Personal Injury Negligence Employer's Liability Risk Assessment Duty of Care Non Delegable Duty Causation +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 2 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Robert Lee Uren

Claimant

Corporate Leisure (UK) Limited

First Defendant

Ministry of Defence

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury / Re Trial Following Court of Appeal Remittal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What was the degree of risk of serious injury entailed in the game as played on the day of the Claimant's accident?
  2. 2 Was that degree of risk acceptable in light of the social value of the game?
  3. 3 Did the Defendants fail to carry out adequate risk assessments and breach their duty of care?

Ratio Decidendi

Both Defendants failed to carry out adequate risk assessments for the pool game, specifically failing to consider the risk of headfirst entry into the pool. The risk of serious injury was foreseeable and unacceptable given the competitive nature and physical setup of the game. Liability is established against both Defendants for breach of duty.

Court Disposition

Liability established against both Defendants; apportionment of liability not determined at this trial.

Orders

  • Damages to be assessed in subsequent proceedings.
  • Costs reserved.