Prancerpoos
Well-Known Member
This is going to be an interesting case - I am not sure if this is insurance companies fighting or what, but it does pose some questions around liability of owners v expectations of riders when horse riding generally, and hunting probably quite specifically, is inherently dangerous. The incident itself sounds horrific and must have been terrifying for all concerned, especially the poor rider. It is not clear why the horse died, so was it being 'naughty' when it reared over or was it actually in its death throes? From the prosecution's POV it does not seem to matter anyway.
Thoughts?
Rider hurt by ‘naughty horse’ sues owner
Woman crushed while out hunting says her former employer should be held responsible
A rider claims that she was seriously hurt when a “naughty horse” reared up before falling and crushing her while she was out with the Prince of Wales’s favourite hunt.
Lisa Ford, 41, is suing the businessman who owns the animal for £100,000 in damages, claiming that he was responsible for the “hot horse” that left her with multiple injuries, including a broken pelvis and internal bleeding. She was riding with the Beaufort Hunt, one of the oldest and largest foxhunting packs in England, on the Duke of Beaufort’s 52,000-acre Badminton estate in Gloucestershire. It is understood that Prince Charles bought Highgrove, his home in Gloucestershire, because it was near the Beaufort Hunt, which both he and the Duchess of Cornwall have supported.
Ms Ford, a groom, is suing her former employer, Jonathan Seymour-Williams, 66, who is a director of several businesses and was the keeper of the horse she was riding.
She told a High Court judge yesterday that she was injured when the horse — an experienced hunter named Tommy whom the groom cared for and rode regularly — reared because he was “a hot horse” who was “being naughty”. The horse died in the incident in 2018. Ms Ford has asked the court to order Mr Seymour-Williams to pay compensation for her injuries after she claimed that she was riding Tommy at the hunt as part of her job. She said she was preparing the horse for Mr Seymour-Williams’s son and daughter to ride out hunting later in the season. Mr Seymour-Williams, the director of three companies in Warwickshire and Wiltshire, including one that produces veneer and wood panels, along with management and property consultancies, denies any liability. He claimed that the horse was not being “naughty” and insisted that Ms Ford was riding with the hunt “for fun . . . on a frolic of her own”. Judge Michael Kent, QC, sitting at the High Court in London, was told that Ms Ford, who lives in Badminton, broke her pelvis in five places and suffered a fractured left hip socket, internal bleeding and nerve damage as well as a psychiatric injury when Tommy reared and fell backwards on her.
The judge was told that after falling on Ms Ford, Tommy thrashed and pinned her to the ground as he died. The groom remained under the dead horse until an air ambulance arrived. Giles Mooney, QC, for Ms Ford, told the judge she was suing under the Animals Act 1971, claiming that Tommy was “triggered” into the dangerous act of rearing either by “disobedience” or because he was, unknown to the rider, “undergoing a catastrophic internal injury”, which led to his death. In either event Mr Seymour-Williams was legally liable, the QC argued. But Georgina Crawford, for Mr Seymour-Williams, said that it was bad luck and Ms Ford's employer was not responsible. Ms Ford said she was riding Tommy on the day “to prepare him to hunt for Jonks’s [Mr Seymour-Williams’s] children the following weekend”. She added that she “wanted to make sure he had been hunted at least once before they took him so that he would behave well for them. It’s my job description to make sure the horse is suitably prepared.” Ms Ford told the court that Tommy was “a fun horse . . . he wanted to be fast moving and do things”, but added: “He was a horse that could be naughty when excited. You needed to be a good rider for Tommy. He could misbehave while out hunting. That’s the reason I had to school him to make sure he would behave for the children. Tommy was a hot horse. No one would deny Tommy was a hot horse.
Full link below.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rider-hurt-by-naughty-horse-sues-owner-zm8w8lcxw
Thoughts?
Rider hurt by ‘naughty horse’ sues owner
Woman crushed while out hunting says her former employer should be held responsible
A rider claims that she was seriously hurt when a “naughty horse” reared up before falling and crushing her while she was out with the Prince of Wales’s favourite hunt.
Lisa Ford, 41, is suing the businessman who owns the animal for £100,000 in damages, claiming that he was responsible for the “hot horse” that left her with multiple injuries, including a broken pelvis and internal bleeding. She was riding with the Beaufort Hunt, one of the oldest and largest foxhunting packs in England, on the Duke of Beaufort’s 52,000-acre Badminton estate in Gloucestershire. It is understood that Prince Charles bought Highgrove, his home in Gloucestershire, because it was near the Beaufort Hunt, which both he and the Duchess of Cornwall have supported.
Ms Ford, a groom, is suing her former employer, Jonathan Seymour-Williams, 66, who is a director of several businesses and was the keeper of the horse she was riding.
She told a High Court judge yesterday that she was injured when the horse — an experienced hunter named Tommy whom the groom cared for and rode regularly — reared because he was “a hot horse” who was “being naughty”. The horse died in the incident in 2018. Ms Ford has asked the court to order Mr Seymour-Williams to pay compensation for her injuries after she claimed that she was riding Tommy at the hunt as part of her job. She said she was preparing the horse for Mr Seymour-Williams’s son and daughter to ride out hunting later in the season. Mr Seymour-Williams, the director of three companies in Warwickshire and Wiltshire, including one that produces veneer and wood panels, along with management and property consultancies, denies any liability. He claimed that the horse was not being “naughty” and insisted that Ms Ford was riding with the hunt “for fun . . . on a frolic of her own”. Judge Michael Kent, QC, sitting at the High Court in London, was told that Ms Ford, who lives in Badminton, broke her pelvis in five places and suffered a fractured left hip socket, internal bleeding and nerve damage as well as a psychiatric injury when Tommy reared and fell backwards on her.
The judge was told that after falling on Ms Ford, Tommy thrashed and pinned her to the ground as he died. The groom remained under the dead horse until an air ambulance arrived. Giles Mooney, QC, for Ms Ford, told the judge she was suing under the Animals Act 1971, claiming that Tommy was “triggered” into the dangerous act of rearing either by “disobedience” or because he was, unknown to the rider, “undergoing a catastrophic internal injury”, which led to his death. In either event Mr Seymour-Williams was legally liable, the QC argued. But Georgina Crawford, for Mr Seymour-Williams, said that it was bad luck and Ms Ford's employer was not responsible. Ms Ford said she was riding Tommy on the day “to prepare him to hunt for Jonks’s [Mr Seymour-Williams’s] children the following weekend”. She added that she “wanted to make sure he had been hunted at least once before they took him so that he would behave well for them. It’s my job description to make sure the horse is suitably prepared.” Ms Ford told the court that Tommy was “a fun horse . . . he wanted to be fast moving and do things”, but added: “He was a horse that could be naughty when excited. You needed to be a good rider for Tommy. He could misbehave while out hunting. That’s the reason I had to school him to make sure he would behave for the children. Tommy was a hot horse. No one would deny Tommy was a hot horse.
Full link below.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rider-hurt-by-naughty-horse-sues-owner-zm8w8lcxw
