No payout for pensioner as car-park ice-slip appeal dismissed

AN 83-year-old Swansea man, badly injured when he slipped on ice in an unmanned city car park, has had his compensation hopes dashed by senior judges.

Ivor Cook, of Dana Drive, Sketty, broke his ankle in the accident during polar weather conditions on December 8, 2012, at the Bush car park in Sketty.

He was on his way to do shopping when he came to grief, and sued the city council for £11,000 in damages.

The case went all the way to the Court of Appeal, in London, but yesterday Mr Cook was left emptyhanded after judges ruled the council was not to blame.

Lord Justice Hamblen said ice during cold weather was “an obvious hazard” and public authorities generally owed no duty to protect against it.

The council had a “reactive” system for dealing with ice in its unmanned car parks, only sending out gritters when alerted by members of the public.

Anything else would require “staff and material resources” and might well lead to closure of unmanned car parks during bad weather, he added.

That would be “a considerable inconvenience” to local people and visitors to the city.

And, clearing the council, the judge noted there had never been any previous reports of hazardous ice in the Bush car park, nor any previous accidents due to ice.

The court heard earlier that Mr Cook fell at around 10.30am as he descended an incline on his way to the ticket machine.

Council officers had been warned that a freeze was imminent, and had dispatched gritting lorries in the early hours.

But the judge said the Bush car park was one of 46 run by the council, only three of which are manned, and the council’s gritting effort was focused on highways.

Mr Cook’s lawyers argued that the council should have employed a more “proactive” system.

But the council’s barrister, Timothy Petts, argued there were limits to what could be done and told the court: “Swansea City Council cannot control the weather”.

Dismissing Mr Cook’s appeal against an earlier ruling, Lord Justice Hamblen found that the council had not breached its duty of care.