Clark v Farley & Anor

Clark v Farley & Anor

The claimant was not party to a joint enterprise to ride dangerously with either rider and did not intend to encourage or assist dangerous driving. The defence of ex turpi causa fails. Both riders were negligent and jointly and severally liable. The claimant was contributorily negligent for failing to wear a helmet and for not considering the risks, warranting a 40% reduction in damages. Liability between the first and third defendants is apportioned equally.

Parties
Claimant: Mr Liam Clark (a protected party suing by his Mother and litigation friend Nicola Woods); First Defendant: Mr Darren Lee Farley; Second Defendant: Motor Insurers’ Bureau; Third Defendant: Ryan Edmonds
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 May 2018
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury / Liability Trial
Outcome
Claim allowed in part; judgment for claimant subject to reduction for contributory negligence.
Legal Topics
Personal Injury, Motorcycle Accident, Contributory Negligence, Ex Turpi Causa, Joint Enterprise, Dangerous Driving, Uninsured Drivers
Tort Law Insurance Law Personal Injury Motorcycle Accident Contributory Negligence Ex Turpi Causa Joint Enterprise Dangerous Driving +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 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Liam Clark (a protected party suing by his Mother and litigation friend Nicola Woods)

Claimant

Mr Darren Lee Farley

First Defendant

Motor Insurers’ Bureau

Second Defendant

Ryan Edmonds

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury / Liability Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant was party to a joint criminal enterprise of dangerous driving so as to bar recovery under ex turpi causa
  2. 2 Whether the claimant was contributorily negligent for riding as a pillion passenger without a helmet and on an off-road motorcycle in prohibited circumstances
  3. 3 Apportionment of liability between the defendants

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant was not party to a joint enterprise to ride dangerously with either rider and did not intend to encourage or assist dangerous driving. The defence of ex turpi causa fails. Both riders were negligent and jointly and severally liable. The claimant was contributorily negligent for failing to wear a helmet and for not considering the risks, warranting a 40% reduction in damages. Liability between the first and third defendants is apportioned equally.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed in part; judgment for claimant subject to reduction for contributory negligence.

Orders

  • Claimant entitled to recover 60% of damages to be assessed against the first and third defendants, jointly and severally.
  • Second defendant (MIB) to satisfy judgment under the Uninsured Drivers Agreement.