A DRIVER who suffered serious injuries when a horse crashed on to the roof of his car had his High Court damages overturned by the Supreme Court yesterday.
Mr Patrick O'Shea (59), a retired bakery manager of Rosehill, Sligo, had brought an action against Mr Tilman Anhold, managing director of Horse Holiday Farm Ltd, near Grange, Co Sligo.
The accident happened on January 2nd, 1990, when a mare belonging to the company collided with Mr O'Shea's car at Moneygold, Cliffoney, Co Sligo.
In the High Court, Mr Justice Costello found the holiday company negligent, held there was no contributory negligence, and awarded Mr O'Shea £50,000 general damages.
Mr Anhold and his company were yesterday successful in their appeal against the High Court finding.
Mr Justice O'Flaherty in his judgment said Mr O'Shea had been driving along a busy highway, on a dark night, on dimmed headlights, and out of the blue a horse crashed on to the roof of his car.
His counsel, said Mr Justice O'Flaherty, had said the horse resembled Pegasus, the winged horse of Greek mythology, in performing such a feat, and counsel had asked how Mr O'Shea was expected to cope with that.
The judge had said that in his judgment there was no negligence on Mr O'Shea's part.
He said Mr Anhold had been involved with horses for 25 and after feeding the horses on that day was sure he had closed the gates.
Two experts gave evidence in the High Court that the fencing was adequate and believed someone must have let the animal out on to the road. One expert agreed a horse could jump from three to seven feet but he (the expert) would be surprised if a horse would do so without being urged or forced.
Mr Justice O'Flaherty said the most that was required of a defendant in this situation, where the onus of proof rested on him, was to disprove any negligence on his part. It was not as if this was a case of strict or absolute liability. The High Court judge, in effect, had gone close to imposing strict liability on the defendants and had gone too far.
Mr Justice Keane, agreeing with Mr Justice O'Flaherty's decision, said the trial judge considered it more likely that the fencing was "inadequate" and found the company negligent.
Even if the trial judge was satisfied as a matter of probability that the horse had managed in some fashion to surmount the fencing, it would not follow this was due to any want of reasonable care on the part of the defendants.