The Courier & Advertiser (Fife Edition)
Man seeks almost £1m in damages for accident
Craig Anderson believes couple did not do enough to prevent him being injured
A Perth man who claims to have suffered brain damage after being injured whilst playing on a farm has gone to court seeking £950,000 compensation from his play mate’s parents.
Craig Anderson, 21, says that farmers John and Antoinette Imrie didn’t do enough to prevent him from injuring himself when he was eight-years-old.
The Court of Session in Edinburgh heard yesterday how Mr Anderson was playing with the couple’s son, Ben, at Hillhead Farm in Torrance, East Dunbartonshire, on June 28 2003.
Mr Anderson, of Perth, told the court of how he was playing football in a field with Ben when the pair decided to herd sheep through a gate into a steading.
He told his advocate, Robert Skinner, that he climbed onto the first rung of the gate and lifted the chain from the metal post to open it.
However, as he did so, the gate fell on top of him, pinning him to the ground.
Mr Anderson told Mr Skinner that the steading wasn’t properly secured when he attempted to open the gate and this caused it to fall on him.
Mr Anderson seeks compensation on the basis that the Imries had a duty to see that he, as an eight-year-old, didn’t suffer injury.
His lawyers claim that he has suffered a brain injury which affected his academic performance and his ability to form and maintain relationships.
Mr Anderson’s legal team also claim that their client’s alleged injury deprived him of having a professional career and that his earning capacity is now “seriously damaged.”
The Imries say they fulfilled all duties of reasonable care towards Mr Anderson.
The farmers also say that 12 months following the accident, Mr Anderson was examined at the Institute of Neurological Sciences and was thought to have “done well.”
They say the only problem noted at the time was that he suffered occasional headaches and he was discharged from further medical care in July 2004.
The Imries say he did not seek medical help for headaches or any other condition said to have been caused by the accident.
They also state that the pursuer had problems with his academic performance before the accident and that this continued after the incident.
In addition, the Imries state that there were no reports after the accident of social or behavioural problems at school.
And they claim that evidence shows that it was “unlikely” that Mr Anderson would have pursued a professional career.
The Imries also say that in the event of them being found liable, the award of damages to Mr Anderson should be “reduced” because the accident was caused, or last contributed to, by the “fault and negligence” of his actions.
The proof hearing, before judge Lord Pentland, continues.