A inexperienced power boss who launched a £1.5m lawsuit in opposition to a theme park over claims a experience left him crippled should now pay £200,000 in prices after he was caught white water rafting in South Africa.
Richard Walkden, 62, sued for the seven-figure sum, alleging {that a} cable automobile accident at Drayton Manor Park left him with ache so unhealthy he was ‘completely unable to bend his again’.
However his damages declare in opposition to the guardian firm, was thrown out after a decide noticed social media images of him on a rafting expedition along with his household.
The pictures confirmed him kitted out in a buoyancy help and helmet, sat on the sting of a raft earlier than it set off by the rapids of the Crocodile River, close to Pretoria.
A decide discovered Mr Walkden – who beforehand labored as managing director of inexperienced power agency, Eartheat Ltd in Leicestershire – ‘essentially dishonest’ and he was ordered to pay £200,000 in legal professionals payments, with extra to return on high.
Excessive Court docket decide Mrs Justice Tipples mentioned the county courtroom trial decide had been entitled to search out that Mr Walkden’s declare was dishonest as he had exaggerated his accidents.
Photographs of Richard Walkden confirmed him kitted out in a buoyancy help and helmet, sat on the sting of a raft earlier than it set off by the rapids of the Crocodile River, close to Pretoria
The courtroom heard the accident occurred when an operator on the Staffordshire theme park set off a cable automobile containing Mr Walkden and his household too rapidly, inflicting it to swing.
He suffered a again harm whereas he stood in an ungainly place, attempting to guard his younger sons on the Easter 2014 outing.
Suing for £1.5m, he claimed the accident had left him with continual ache, which had put an finish to his profession and his beekeeping pastime.
He was unable to bend his again in any respect, he claimed, and had additionally suffered psychiatric accidents within the traumatic occasion.
Drayton Manor Park Ltd admitted legal responsibility for the accident, however disputed the dimensions of Mr Walkden’s declare and the extent of his accidents.
Proof confirmed he had gone on a white water rafting expedition on the Crocodile River, in South Africa’s West Province, simply eight months after the cable automobile incident.
Social media images confirmed Mr Walkden sat on the sting of a raft in rafting gear, whereas legal professionals pointed at different images which they mentioned confirmed him taking place the river with the remainder of his celebration.
Mr Walkden, who ran a renewable power firm, claimed he had not taken half in all the exercise, claiming he had solely joined the celebration after the rapids, solely paddling in calm waters.
However giving the unique judgment at Leicester County Court docket in March final 12 months, Choose Murdoch dismissed his declare.
‘I don’t settle for that he didn’t do the complete journey, he’s kitted as much as do it, his youngsters are within the image and but none of them of their proof says that he didn’t do the complete journey,’ he mentioned.
A decide discovered Mr Walkden ‘essentially dishonest’ and the Leicestershire father did not overturn the discovering, ordering to pay £200,000 in legal professionals payments, with extra to return on high
‘If I had been fallacious with that evaluation I might discover that in any occasion he was nonetheless required to paddle even on flat water and that will have been a tough, bodily exercise.
‘The raft would must be ported out and in of the water which once more could be onerous bodily exercise. His proof was not in my judgment credible or dependable on this subject.’
The decide discovered that – though Mr Walkden would have been entitled to £17,600 compensation for the accident – he had exaggerated his accidents a lot that the declare was ‘essentially dishonest’ and could be dismissed.
Difficult the discovering on the Excessive Court docket, Mr Walkden’s barrister Satinder Hunjan QC argued that the decide had not correctly taken account of all the proof in Mr Walkden’s favour.
Witnesses instructed how he had had to surrender his hobbies of biking and beekeeping, and the one correct discovering that the decide may have made was that Mr Walkden had suffered ‘extreme penalties’ on account of the cable automobile accident.
Rejecting the attraction and upholding the dishonesty discovering and Mr Walkden’s six-figure invoice for the case, Mrs Justice Tipples mentioned Choose Murdoch had not ignored or did not have in mind proof.
The witnesses had solely given proof about their notion of how Mr Walkden offered his incapacity to them, she mentioned, and Choose Murdoch had discovered that Mr Walkden was not ‘credible’ when it got here to his self-presentation of harm and ache.
‘The decide had a wealth of proof earlier than him on these points from lay witnesses, medical specialists, contemporaneous paperwork and so forth,’ she mentioned.
‘The decide devotes most of his judgment to summarising, and analysing all this proof which was positioned earlier than him in relation to those points.
‘He does so, for my part, succinctly and with appreciable care and, consequently, he discovered that the appellant was not a reputable witness, and had exaggerated his accidents.
Mr Walkden, pictured, ran the Leicestershire-based inexperienced power enterprise Eartheat
‘It was in that context that the decide rejected the appellant’s case that he was affected by a continual ache syndrome. The appellant didn’t undergo a life-changing harm on account of the accident which meant he was unable to work.
‘There was ample proof earlier than the decide on which to achieve this conclusion, and it’s not a discovering of truth which can’t be moderately defined or justified.’
He concluded: ‘There was ample proof earlier than the decide to conclude that the appellant had been ‘essentially dishonest in relation to the first declare or associated declare’ and the declare needs to be dismissed.’
The choice means Mr Walkden has to pay Drayton Manor’s prices of defending the declare, with £200,000 up entrance, pending a full evaluation of his closing invoice.
Attorneys say the ultimate invoice is prone to complete ‘a number of hundred hundreds kilos.’
Source link