Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.
Runner could have avoided collision with galloping horses if he had kept a ‘proper lookout’
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
High Court dismisses an action for damages for personal injuries occasioned to a runner when he collided with galloping horse on an open plain known as a 'gallops', on the grounds, inter alia, that: (a) the occupiers of the land were not under a duty to erect signs warning of galloping horses, nor to fence off the areas where horses were being trained; and (b) the runner could have avoided the accident if he had been keeping a look out for animals, and had he not been listening to music on headphones.
Collision between runner and galloping horse - claim against managers of racecourse and 'gallops' - area operated by private company under licence from Minister for Defence - s. 2 of the Curragh of Kildare Act 1961 - claim against owners of 'gallops' and trainer of horse - Curragh Acts - licence - covenant not to enclose lands - claim that defendants were negligent - Occupiers’ Liability Act 1995 - Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Act 2005 - failure to protect pedestrians from galloping horses - dislocated shoulder - PTSD - severe pain - arthritis - whether sign should have been placed to warn of galloping horses - appropriate location of such a sign - whether gallops should have been cordoned off - whether runner had been negligent - whether listening to music on earphones was negligent.
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
