Q&As

Are there any cases like Cook v Swansea City Council where the court has considered whether the fact a car park is free or imposes a charge makes a difference to what is reasonable in the circumstances?

read titleRead full title
Produced in partnership with Peter Edwards of Devereux Chambers
Published on LexisPSL on 26/02/2018

The following PI & Clinical Negligence Q&A produced in partnership with Peter Edwards of Devereux Chambers provides comprehensive and up to date legal information covering:

  • Are there any cases like Cook v Swansea City Council where the court has considered whether the fact a car park is free or imposes a charge makes a difference to what is reasonable in the circumstances?

The issue of whether the imposition of a charge makes a difference to what is reasonable in the circumstances was addressed by the Court of Appeal in the case of Trustees of Portsmouth Youth Activities v Poppleton. The claimant sustained catastrophic injury at a commercial indoor climbing centre, which charged a fee for the use of its facilities, when he attempted a dangerous leap from one climbing wall to another. Leaping from one wall to the other was prohibited by the rules of the climbing centre but the claimant was not shown those rules when he signed in and paid the entrance fee. The actual climbing was not supervised.

In overturning a finding of 25% primary liability that was made against the defendant by the trial judge at first instance (HHJ Richard Foster) the Court of Appeal held, in the lead judgment of May LJ (paragraph 20), that:

‘There being inherent and obvious risks in the activity which Mr Poppleton was voluntarily undertaking, the

Related documents:

Popular documents