header-logo header-logo

07 August 2008
Issue: 7333 / Categories: Legal News , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

Appeal court overturns bouncy castle decision

Legal news

The Court of Appeal decision that a couple who hired a bouncy castle were not liable for an accident that left a boy brain-damaged is a robust one, lawyers say.

Catherine and Timothy Perry faced a £1m compensation payout after the High Court ruled they had not adequately supervised Sam Harris who suffered brain-damage after another boy somersaulted and struck his forehead. However, the appeal court said Sam’s injuries were caused by “a freak and tragic accident” which occurred without fault.

Philip Mot t QC, of Outer Temple Chambers, says this was a “robust decision” which will be welcomed by those “who fear that the compensation culture has gone so far that children can no longer be allowed to enjoy themselves”.

Andrew Underwood, head of large loss at Keoghs, who acted for the Perrys says: “The appeal court stressed that the level of supervision to be expected of parents must match the level of risk associated with the activity in question. One cannot rule out risk from all activities. In this case the expected risk of injury associated with bouncy castles was not a risk of serious harm, as in fact, tragically, arose.”

Issue: 7333 / Categories: Legal News , Personal injury
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll