Kristopher Hicks to receive damages from a taxi driver who "abducted" him in Bath A man from Bath who suffered severe brain damage when he jumped out of a moving taxi is to receive damages from the cabbie who "abducted" him.
Kristopher Hicks has never been able to speak to anyone about the incident after a night out in the city in November 2010, when he was 23, said Mr Justice Edis at London's High Court.
The taxi, driven by Michael Young, was travelling at more than 20mph when Mr Hicks, of Holcombe Green, Bath, who was relatively sober and of good character, decided to get out.
Deciding the issue of liability, the judge said Mr Young, of Poplar Close, Bath, drove off because he had formed the mistaken view that Mr Hicks and his girlfriend were not going to pay the fare and were planning to "do a runner".
He intended to drive Mr Hicks back to the rank to teach him a lesson by causing him as much inconvenience as he could.
The judge said there was no basis for Mr Young's belief and Mr Hicks, who found himself being driven off by a stranger into the night, decided he should try to escape.
"The end result is that the claimant decided to jump out of the taxi at a dangerous speed. I do not know why he did this.
"It may have been that he misjudged the speed and thought it was safe to do so, but the true motive will never be known."
The judge said it was a "stark and unattractive choice" to decide between Mr Hicks, whose case was that he was entitled to recover 100% of his claim despite his folly, and Mr Young, who said he should pay nothing despite his deliberate wrongdoing.
He concluded there should be a 50% reduction in the damages payable to Mr Hicks, which will be assessed at a later date, and he was also entitled to a further £250 for unlawful imprisonment.
He said Mr Hicks was driven away from his home for about three-quarters of a mile unlawfully which, taken on its own, would be an irritating and unsettling incident, but not one with serious consequences.
Had Mr Hicks left the vehicle when it was stationary at lights, the impact of the abduction would have been transitory.
"I have broadly accepted the evidence of the defendant and therefore find that his intention was not to to do anything other than to return him to the rank where he would be released.
"This is the kind of conduct which creates a significant risk to life and limb as this case demonstrates."
Both sides were given permission to appeal.
Read more:
http://www.westerndailypress.co.uk/Kris ... z3YETIj7n3
Login
Register
FAQ
