Freeman v Higher Park Farm
The appellant failed to prove that bucking was not a normal characteristic of horses or that it only occurred at particular times or circumstances, and there was no evidence that the horse had previously bucked in a way likely to cause injury. Even if strict liability could have arisen, the appellant voluntarily accepted the risk of injury by choosing to continue riding after being warned and after experiencing a prior buck.
- Parties
- Appellant: Marian Freeman; Respondent: Higher Park Farm
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 30 October 2008
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Strict Liability for Animals, Voluntary Assumption of Risk, Animals Act 1971, Personal Injury
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Marian Freeman
Appellant
Higher Park Farm
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the respondent is strictly liable under section 2(2) of the Animals Act 1971 for injuries caused by a horse bucking and throwing the appellant
- 2 Whether the appellant voluntarily accepted the risk under section 5(2) of the Animals Act 1971
Ratio Decidendi
The appellant failed to prove that bucking was not a normal characteristic of horses or that it only occurred at particular times or circumstances, and there was no evidence that the horse had previously bucked in a way likely to cause injury. Even if strict liability could have arisen, the appellant voluntarily accepted the risk of injury by choosing to continue riding after being warned and after experiencing a prior buck.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment