Key Facts
- •On 17 May 2018, professional motorcycle racer Shane Byrne crashed during a test day at the Snetterton motor racing circuit.
- •Byrne's motorcycle left the track, and he jumped off before it hit a safety barrier.
- •Byrne sustained serious injuries.
- •The case concerned liability for Byrne's injuries, involving Motorsport Vision Racing Limited (MSVR), Motorsport Vision Limited (MSV), and the Motorcycle Circuit Racing Control Board Limited (MCRCB).
- •The design and safety of the safety barrier at Turn 3 ('Palmer's') were central to the case.
- •The barrier consisted of a Type D (tyre wall) with no additional protective device (APD).
- •After the accident, Type A APDs were added to the barrier.
- •Expert evidence was given on both sides regarding the design, safety, and the effect of different types of barriers.
Legal Principles
Occupiers' Liability Act 1957 (OLA): Occupiers owe a duty of care to visitors to take reasonable care to ensure their safety.
Occupiers' Liability Act 1957
Volenti non fit iniuria: A claimant cannot claim for injuries if they willingly accepted the risk.
Common Law
Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977: Contract terms excluding liability for personal injury caused by negligence are ineffective.
Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977
Negligence: A defendant is liable for negligence if they fail to take reasonable care and that failure causes harm.
Common Law
Bolam test: A professional is not negligent if their actions are supported by a responsible body of opinion within their profession.
Bolam v Friern Hospital [1957] 1 WLR 583; Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1997] UKHL 46
Causation: The defendant's negligence must have caused the claimant's injuries.
Common Law
Outcomes
The claim for liability was successful against all three defendants (MSVR, MSV, and MCRCB).
The court found that the defendants breached their duty of care by failing to provide adequate safety barriers at Turn 3. The lack of a Type A APD on the Type D barrier was deemed negligent, and it was concluded that the use of a Type A APD would likely have prevented Byrne's injuries.
The claimant was not found to be contributorily negligent.
The court found that Byrne's actions in the moments leading up to the crash were reasonable given the circumstances.