Jessica Rose Gadsby v Julie Hayes (formerly Emms)
[2024] EWHC 2142 (KB)
Jake Hammond (by his litigation friend Lesley Waller) v Jane Gibbon
17 October 2023
[2023] EWHC 2550 (KB)
High Court
A little boy ran into the road and got hit by a car. Even though the driver didn't see the boy until it was too late, the judge said she wasn't driving badly and couldn't have stopped in time. So, the people suing the driver lost the case.
Key Facts
- •On September 18, 2004, 4-year-old Jake Hammond was seriously injured in a road traffic accident after being struck by a Land Rover driven by the defendant, Jane Gibbon.
- •The accident occurred on a residential estate, with clear weather and good visibility.
- •Jake suffered severe head, brain, and body injuries, including skull fractures and haemorrhaging.
- •The factual evidence included police statements from witnesses, witness statements from the claimant's mother and the defendant, and expert evidence from accident reconstruction and medical experts.
- •There was a dispute regarding the exact location of the accident and Jake's actions leading up to the collision.
- •The experts agreed that reconstructing the events was difficult due to the lack of detailed evidence and the passage of time.
Legal Principles
Negligence: Did the defendant's driving fall below the standard of a reasonably competent driver?
Common Law
Determining reliability of evidence: Evidence closer to the time of the event is generally more reliable.
Judicial discretion
Perception-reaction time (PRT): The time taken between recognizing a hazard and reacting to it.
Expert evidence and research studies (Krauss, Cohen, Muttart, Wu)
Outcomes
Claim dismissed.
The judge found that the defendant did not fall below the standard of a reasonably competent driver and that, given the short time Jake was visible and the angle of his appearance, there was no opportunity to brake in time to prevent the collision.