This site uses cookies.

McMahon v Rouse - Mary Kay, Spencers Solicitors

10/07/19. Case name: McMahon v Rouse. Court name: Nottingham. Accident date: 01/05/2017. Settlement date: 22/11/2018. Total gross settlement: £80,500.00.

Background

The Claimant was the front seat passenger in a vehicle being lawfully driven along the main carriageway by her partner. The Defendant emerged from a side road at 60 mph and collided with the passenger side of the Claimant's vehicle; the combined impact speed was in the region of 120 mph.

As a result of the collision, the Claimant suffered a Colles type fracture to her right dominant wrist which has ongoing mild stiffness and a serious injury to her right leg. This consisted of a compound, comminute tibial shaft fracture with associated fibula fracture, a Ilizarov frame was applied. There is a significant bowing/ shortening of the leg, the ankle remains stiff and ongoing intrusive symptoms of pain and stiffness/ difficulties on stairs and uneven ground. The leg injury has resulted in visible scarring which has required scar revision surgery.

The Claimant also suffered extensive soft tissue injuries; to include injury to her cervical, thoracic and lumbar spine, requiring physiotherapy treatment; extensive internal and external pain, bruising and swelling to her abdomen from the seatbelt; lacerations to her forehead and extensive bruising around both eyes resulting in a likely possibility of post-concussion syndrome leading to headaches, dizziness and panic attacks, impaired memory and concentration; along with psychological issues requiring extensive CBT treatment. The psychological symptoms consisted of anxiety, low mood and depression, vivid nightmares, passenger and driver anxiety and concerns regarding the scarring to her leg.

The Claimant required a significant amount of care and assistance; particularly in the first few months following the accident and relied on her family for help with all aspects of personal care; meal preparation and lifts to/from appointments.

The Claimant was unable to drive following the accident and incurred travel costs to/from appointments; university and work.

The Claimant also had time off university and work following the accident.

At the point of settlement, the medical evidence was inconclusive and further evidence had been recommended.

Liability

The Defendant was prosecuted for driving without due care and attention and the Defendant’s insures dealt with the Claimant’s claim as she was a passenger. No formal admission of liability was made.

Quantum

Contrary to instructing solicitors advice the Claimant wished to settle her claim. Negotiations were entered into, resulting in a settlement of £75,000.00 net of £5,500.00 received on account.

Solicitors for the Claimant: Mary Kay of Spencers Solicitors Limited

Insurers for the Defendant: ERS Syndicate Services Limited

Image ©iStockphoto.com/keesitt

All information on this site was believed to be correct by the relevant authors at the time of writing. All content is for information purposes only and is not intended as legal advice. No liability is accepted by either the publisher or the author(s) for any errors or omissions (whether negligent or not) that it may contain. 

The opinions expressed in the articles are the authors' own, not those of Law Brief Publishing Ltd, and are not necessarily commensurate with general legal or medico-legal expert consensus of opinion and/or literature. Any medical content is not exhaustive but at a level for the non-medical reader to understand. 

Professional advice should always be obtained before applying any information to particular circumstances.

Excerpts from judgments and statutes are Crown copyright. Any Crown Copyright material is reproduced with the permission of the Controller of OPSI and the Queen’s Printer for Scotland under the Open Government Licence.