Description
The Claimant suffered catastrophic injuries when her scarf got caught in the moving parts of a go-kart. She brought a claim against the manufacturer of the kart, the owner of the kart and the karting centre that sold the kart.
The Claimant discontinued her claim against the manufacturer of the kart before judgment. Regulations which required a guard to cover moving parts at the rear of the kart had not come in to force until after the kart had been manufactured.
It was held that the Claimant's scarf was secure when she got into the kart therefore it was not reasonably foreseeable to the owner that it would become caught once the kart was in motion. In addition, it would not be fair, just and reasonable to impose a duty on the kart owner. The moving parts at the rear of the kart were no more obvious to him than to the Claimant. This was not a commercial organisation but a group of friends meeting for social reasons.
The Claimant argued that the karting centre was liable because it had supplied the kart to the owner without risk-assessing it or confirming that it was safe to use. It was held that there was no common law duty on those who supplied the kart to check the kart. The kart merely had to comply with the applicable regulations.
