Company director (43) settles case after breaking ankle on ski holiday

A company director who sued after slipping and fracturing his ankle at the start of a ski holiday in France has settled his High Court action.

Darren Clarke (43) had sued an Irish ski operator after he claimed he fell and dislocated his right ankle when he had to walk with his luggage on snow and ice covered streets at his ski resort in Chamonix to retrieve the key for his accommodation.

On the third day of the hearing, the court was informed the matter was settled and could be struck out. The details of the settlement are confidential.

Mr Clarke had told the court he was pulling a suitcase on wheels and had two bags including one with his ski boots at around 10pm on a January night in 2016 when the accident happened.

He was in a French hospital for three days and had to get an air ambulance home.

He claimed he was not able to work for a number of months after the accident.

He claimed he had €102,000 in losses as a result of the accident, but the defendant’s side contended if there were any losses, it would be in the region of €9,000.

Mr Clarke, Friarsland Avenue, Goatstown, Dublin had sued Tony Collins Agency Limited with registered offices at Jervis House, Jervis Street, Dublin, and trading as Directski.com. The claims were denied and it was contended he was the author of his own misfortune, and was wearing inappropriate footwear.

Mr Clarke had a booking dated 20 January, 2016 for a package holiday with flights into Geneva, Switzerland and transfers to his accommodation in the Chamonix Valley as well as ski lift passes and equipment rental.

He claimed when he got the bus transfer to Chamonix, he and his cousin were dropped off at a certain location and told their accommodation was “right over there”.

He claimed they could not access the accommodation and they had to walk to another address with their luggage to get a key. It was alleged during the walk, suddenly and without warning, Mr Clarke slipped and fell on ice.

It was claimed there was a failure to transfer Mr Clarke directly to his accommodation and the men had been dropped off at the alleged incorrect location.

It was further claimed Mr Clarke had been allowed to walk at a time and place when it was unwise, unsafe or dangerous to do so given his absolute lack of knowledge of the location or directions to his accommodation.

Mr Clarke had to wear a leg cast and was on crutches after the accident.

It was further claimed that Mr Clarke after the accident was greatly restricted in meeting and dealing with his customers. His business allegedly suffered a discernible reduction in turnover and consequent loss of profit for the year.

If you would like an assessment of a claim, you can use the online form available here without obligation or alternatively you can use the automatic claim calculator.

Follow us for the latest updates & news

Recent News

Northern Ireland exam board boss wins £100,000 settlement

Northern Ireland’s Council for the Curriculum, Examinations and Assessment (CCEA) has paid a substantial settlement to its former interim chief executive who complained of sex, race and age discrimination and constructive dismissal. The sum paid to Margaret Farragher,...

Catriona Crumlish v Health Service Executive – Court of Appeal

On Oct. 15th, The Court of Appeal upheld the High Court decision against Caitriona Crumlish in her claim against Letterkenny University hospital. The plaintiff alleged that there was a failure to detect and diagnose breast cancer in May 2017 resulting in an alleged...

Recent Articles

Psychological Injury

Nervous Shock I The law allows recovery of damages for so called nervous shock, within certain parameters and subject to limitations.  Nervous shock is the most commonly used legal label for psychiatric or psychological injury. Psychiatric injuries include...

Public Authorities and Negligence

Powers and Duties In broad terms, public authorities are subject to civil liability for negligence and other civil wrongs, in the same way as private individuals and companies.  The State and other public bodies are responsible for the actions and omissions of...

Duty of Care (Part 2)

Limits to Neighbour Principle The famous neighbour principle re-stated the general basis of liability in negligence. It stated, that “you must take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions which you can reasonably foresee would be likely to injure your...

Duty of Care (Part 1)

Meaning of Negligence I Negligence is used in a number of senses.  In one sense, it refers to a person’s state of mind.  An act is negligent, where it is done without giving due weight to the risks involved.  A person  (and his state of mind) may...

Join our Panel

You May Also Like...