MUM’S € 14K AWARD FOR BACK INJURY AFTER BOUNCY CASTLE JUMP
A mum of three who suffered a severe back injury after playing on a bouncy castle slide with her son at her nephew’s First Communion party has been awarded € 14,000 damages at the High Court in Sligo.
Aisling McGowan ( 45) sued the owner of the bouncy castle along with her sister- in- law and her husband whose garden the castle was erected for personal injuries arising from the accident in May 2012.
The court was told that Mrs McGowan from Drumiskabole, Carraroe had jumped from the top of a slide while holding the hand of her seven year old son and landed at the bottom, a distance of about eight feet having jumped from a height of seven feet.
Mr Justice Ray Fulham held that Mrs McGowan was 80% responsible for the accident saying the slide was not designed for jumping in the manner she did. She claimed she landed in a gap between the slide to the next part, an inflatable obstacle course. Her backside struck the ground resulting in a broken vertebrae in her back.
Mrs McGowan sued S and G Bouncing Castles run by Gerry Gilmartin of Springfield, Ballincar and the householders, David and Roisin Kavanagh of Rock Valley, Dromahair follwing the accident on Saturday, May 19th 2012.
Mrs McGowan said she got on the slide with her then seven year old son, Conor at about 5.50pm having been asked several times by her children to do so up to then. They held hands and jumped and she stated she landed between the two inflatables, the slide and an attached obstacle course.
“There was instant excruciating pain. I knew I did some damage to myself,” the plaintiff said. Her husband, Enda came over and she told him she could not get up or move and that she thought she did something bad.
Her legs were on the obstacle course inflatable while her back was on the opposite side on the slide part. She was brought by ambulance to Sligo Regional Hospital before being transferred on May 22nd to the Spinal Unit of the Mater Hospital in Dublin before returning to Sligo on the 24th.
She said she was in excruciating pain and was on morphine for some time. She still got back pain but not as bad as when the accident occurred. It depended on how busy her day was or the chore she was doing. She had back pain all the time.
She had physiotherpay at Sligo Regional Hospital for up to 12 months after the accident and was advised to do certain exercises and stretches. She would still take pain relief depending on what she was doing. Her children were aged 9, 11 and 14 now.
It was put to the plaintiff by Mr Derry O’Donovan SC ( for S and G Castles), that she shouldn’t have jumped.
“I was having fun with my son and I jumped with him. If I thought I was putting my seven year son in danger I wouldn’t have done it,” she said.
“You should have slid on the slide?” - Mr O’Donovan.
“Nobody was doing that. I jumped with my son, everybody was jumping. No one was sliding down” - plaintiff.
The plaintiff said she wasn’t involved in sport but did some cycling though she had only been out twice this year on her bike.
In reply to Mr O’Donovan she said she had taken two glasses of wine and that she was fine adding that she had some coffee as well. She could not estimate the distance she had jumped though she agreed that in the hospital notes from the Mater Hospital she had mentioned ten feet. Mr O’Donovan said the weight of someone jumping on the slide would compress the structure so much that they were going to hit the ground in any event.
The plaintiff replied that she wasn’t aware that an inflatable wasn’t to be jumped on.
Mr Gerard Clarke SC ( for the Kavanaghs) said the two structures were fastened together by velcro, pieces of rope and iron pegs pushed into the ground so that there was no gap.
The plaintiff said she had jumped a couple of times before the accident.
On the second day of the hearing, Mr Colm Smyth SC ( for the plaintiff ) said the obstacle section of the bouncy castle was sold shortly after the accident and was not available for inspection.
“We suspect it was defective and not properly maintained on the day,” he said.
Recalled, Mrs McGowan denied that at an inspection of the bouncy castle with engineers from all sides at the Kavanagh house in April 2016 that she had told her own engineer that she had slid down the slide and an engineer did a “re- enactment by sliding down the slide.”
Mrs McGowan replied that from day one she stated she had jumped with her son on the slide. In response to Mr Justice Fulham, the plaintiff said she had landed on the very bottom of the slide, her bottom hitting the ground and then slid in between the two inflatables.
Enda McGowan, husband of the plaintiff, told the court said he had seen his wife and son jump and bounce on the slide once or twice before the accident happended.
He had turned to talk to David Kavanagh about a shoe on top of a spike beside the bouncy castle when he heard a moan from his wife and his name being called. His wife had gone between the two inflatables. She said she had pain in her lower back and could not move.
Witness said he entered the slide by side stepping over to her through the crevice. “I slid through to her,” he said.
Dr Mark Jordan, chartered engineer, in evidence said he had never said or gave the impression at the joint inspection that the plaintiff had slid down the slide. He had told an engineer for the defendant that the plaintiff had descended the slide and had landed in the crevice at the foot of it.
Mr Jordan said the slide was designed to bounce on and there was little control over where you bounce. A person could slide but there was no rule of law against bouncing on the slide.
In fact, the majority of users bounced on the slide. It hadn’t a slick surface and there would be no thrill for children if they didn’t bounce on it.
“You would get friction burns if you don’t,” he said.
Witness also stated that a person the size of the plaintiff would not “bottom out” by landing on the slide in the manner she described. It was inflated by up to two feet.
Mr Jordan described the gap between the slide and the obstacle course part of the bouncy castle as dangerous and concealed.
Gerry Gilmartin, owner of the bouncy castle, said he had been in business for about 12 years at the time of the accident and had over 25 bouncy castles. This was the first time he was sued over an accident on a bouncy castle.
The slide and obstacle course was a two section unit. The anchor points are attached to the side of the units and are then pinned to stop them separating.
A tarpaulin flap goes over join while there were also velcro strips. The units were bought in the UK where he was shown how they work and how they are joined. The obstacle units or castles are not for adults, he said. Other items such as sumo suits are available for adults.
When he sets up the castles he hands a list of safety instructions to the person who is hiring it. He could not be certain he did this in this case.
As far as he was concerned the units were for a First Communion party with children playing on them. He went back around 7pm to collect the units and was told by David Kavanagh there had been an accident.
He did not get people to sign the safety instructions. He agreed there was nothing to say that people weren’t allowed to jump up and down on them. The safety instructions stated that the age limit must be specified by the owner.
There were three points of fastening the units together and if they all failed at the same time they would part, he said.
He had been told by Mr Kavanagh that Mrs McGowan had jumped off the castle and that her son had fallen on top of her and that this was the cause of the accident.
In March 2013 he had received a letter about retaining the slide for inspection and a Mr John Ford on behalf of his insurers, looked at it. Mr Gilmartin believed the inspections were done with then and he sold it shortly afterwards on Done Deal. Pics taken at the time of Mr Ford’s inspection were handed in to court.
Wiliam Gaine, consultant at Sligo Unversity Hospital said he examined the plaintiff on April 11th last. The injury was consistent with a fall from a height or a high impact car accident.
She still had some discomfort around the site of the injury but had good mobility in her back.
She continued to have some intermittant pain in her back with pain going into her legs and there was a moderate chance of surgery down the line. She might need painkillers and physiotherapy from time time and a repeat MRI scan if symptoms persisted.
Stephen Mooney, engineer ( for Mr Gilmartin) said that from the description of the accident given to him on the day of the joint inspection at the Kavanagh house he understood that the plaintiff had slid down the slide and ended up “disappearing” in the crevice between the two units and hit the ground.
The units were connected through velcro at the bottom while each section was tied to a stake hammered into the ground and pulled together by a rope. Once the fans were on the pressure compressed the units against each other.
If a person was to jump the seven feet down and the eight feet projection they would land on he run out zone which was not designed to take that kind of impact.
David Kavangh, in evidence, said there had been no discussion with Mr Gilmartin on how to use the bouncy castle nor was he handed any safety instructions.
Mostly the children played on it during the day while one or two adults did so too. He was talking to Enda McGowan when he saw the plaintiff at the top of the slide holding her son’s hand. He didn’t see her jump.
Later, Mr McGowan had told him that their son had landed on top of the plaintiff and he said this to Mr Gilmartin.
Dr Denis Wood, engineer ( for the Kavanaghs) said it was his understanding from the information furnished to him on the day of the joint inspection by Dr Jordan that Mrs McGowan had sat on the top of the slide and then slid down with her son.
Witness agreed there was a run off area at the bottom of the slide which would slow a person down. Adult bouncy castles were more robust with extra stitching he said.
Giving judgment on Monday after a three day eharing, Mr Justice Fulham said the accident occurred because the plaintiff was jumping on a slide not designed for jumping while holding the hand of her seven year old son. She jumped from a height of seven feet and landed on the run- off at the bottom which was two feet off the ground and which was not capable of cushioning her fall. He momentum resulted in her sliding into the crevice.
The Judge said it would have been impossible for her to jump eight feet holding the hand of a child into the gap between the two units.
“The plaintiff is negligent in using the slide in the way she did,” he said adding that her injury could have resulted in paralysis but fortunately she had made a reasonable recovery.
The Judge found that S and G Bouncing Castles and Mr David Kavanagh also had a duty of care and found them each to be ten per cent liable. Mr Justice Fulham said he was satisifed that a safety instruction leaflet had not been given to Mr Kavanagh by Mr Gilmartin nor was any verbal instructions or warnings given about adult jumping on the castle. Also, such warnings should have been pasted on the units in clear terms.
Mr Kavanagh had a duty to supervise the activities of those using the units on his property. He had seen Mrs McGowan jump before the accident and to any reasonable person this was dangerous.
“He had an opportunity to stop it but he didn’t,” said the Judge.
He said while Mrs McGowan was primarily responsible for her own injuries the first and second named defendants “were also guilty of causative negligence by omission.”
There was no evidence of negligence against the third dffendant ( Mrs Kavanagh), he said.
He was treating the injury as a moderate one and was satisfied she would make a good recovery.
General damages were assessed at € 70,000 but the plaintffi is to received 20% of that which is € 14,000, € 7,000 each against S and G Bouncing Castles and Mr Kavanagh.
Costs were awarded on Circuit Court costs were awarded. to the plaintiff.