On agricultural property it is often necessary for farmers and landowners to divide their land into paddock’s for the enclosing of livestock. This is a surprisingly complicated process which has behind it much theory and rationale, and is taught widely at agricultural colleges and higher education institutions. The old process of dry-stone walling is a particularly archaic and quaint method of creating paddocks, still practiced in areas where the appropriate geological formations are present close to the surface. Indeed, the practice of dry-stone walling has been blamed for the destruction of many ancient buildings over the centuries, with such sites as Hadrian’s wall and Doncaster Castle having been largely removed by local farmers grateful for easy access to the correct stones.
Modern practices are somewhat different however. They are more cost-effective methods of confining livestock using easily mass-produced facilities including barbed wire and electrified metal filaments or cables. It is the use of these methods which resulted in the recent injury claim in Horton-Cum-Studley.
Barbed intentions: injury claim in Horton-Cum-Studley
The injury claim in Horton-Cum-Studley occurred when a group of children were camping in the woods near to Horton-Cum-Studley. The youngsters ranged in age from 14 to 19 and were occupying public land between a privately held reservoir and farmland owned by the eventual defendant. Their campsite was near to the corner of one of the farmers smaller paddocks, which over time had become overgrown with the encroaching woodland. This trend, which the farmer later told a court he had not prevented because the diversity of environment, was good for his livestock, giving them a more enriching experience when left to graze.
Unfortunately the barbed wire fence which had been installed some 15 years before had also become overgrown and almost invisible with vines, vegetation and other debris. It was during a game where three of the children tried to climb what appeared to be a low wall or natural feature that the boys received their injury claim in Horton-Cum-Studley injuries. Two boys received serious cuts to their inner legs – one of which also sustained a minor genital injury and both of which underwent treatment for infection. A third boy received lesser injuries to his hands.
Liability in law
Liability for this kind of event in law is dealt with under the heading of so-called ‘occupiers liability’. Occupiers liability in law can be divided into two types, firstly, the duty which an occupier of land owes to visitors to his property, and the duty which he owes to trespassers to his property. The first is covered by the Occupiers Liability Act 1957 and the latter under the Occupiers Liability Act 1984.
In this case, liability was founded very easily following the injury claim in Horton-Cum-Studley and the boys received various sums in damages commensurate with their injuries. If you feel that you might have suffered an injury claim in Horton-Cum-Studley then you should contact Accident Advice Helpline, a process that really couldn’t be easier.
You can call for free on 0800 180 4123 (or 0333 500 0992 from a mobile) or just text “claim365” to 88010. All initial advice and correspondence is on a no obligation basis and even if Accident Advice Helpline take on your case it will be on a no win no fee basis. If you are still not convinced, why not take a look at the unique Accident Advice Helpline’s free online injury claim calculator to get a rough idea of the value of the compensation you could receive.
Date Published: 11th November 2013
Author: David Brown