Helen Pugh examines the courts’ differing approaches to accidents arising out of risky activities
"Adults who choose to engage in physical activities which obviously give rise to a degree of unavoidable risk may find that they have no means of recompense if the risk materialises so that they are injured” (per May LJ in Poppleton v Trustees of the Portsmouth Youth Activities Committee [2008] All ER (D) 150 (Jun) (CA)).
Just how sweepingly is this sweeping statement likely to be applied? The answer seems to be: not very, in light of the ruling in Wilson v Clyne Farm Centre [2013] EWHC 229 (QB) (Swift J).
Wilson v Clyne Farm Centre
Clyne Farm Centre is an outdoor activity centre. One of the activities on offer is a cross country assault course which included a challenge called the Burma Bridge. This challenge had three stages:
- a log climb up to a platform in a tree;
- a rope bridge suspended between that tree and a second tree; and
- a fireman’s pole descent from the platform in the second tree.
Mr Wilson, by his own admission,
