BBC pays TV presenter £1.6m in damages after work injury
TV presenter Jeremy Stansfield has been given £1.6 million in damages by the High Court. He was injured while working on a BBC programme.
During the filming of BBC’s “Bang Goes the Theory” in 2013, Stansfield was injured while carrying out “crash tests,” according to the Sky News.
Stansfield said he suffered spine and brain injuries and lost more than £3 million in potential future earnings. But the BBC disputed the damages claim.
On October 1st, Mrs. Justice Yip delivered his ruling: “While none of the physical injuries were particularly severe, the combined effect together with a psychiatric reaction have caused a constellation of symptoms and problems which have produced a significant impairment in the claimant’s functioning.”
Ruling Grounds
She said that Stansfield is to receive a sum of £1,617,286.20. The verdict was reached with both parties agreeing that Stansfield should recover “two-thirds of the damages assessed as being caused by injuries he sustained when carrying out the crash tests.”
The figure was based on a physical assessment the BBC had Stansfield undergo prior to the accident. “In 2012, the BBC required him to undergo a physical assessment before undertaking a project involving a human-powered aircraft, which he had designed,” Judge Yip said.
TV presenter Jeremy Stansfield has been awarded £1.6 million in damages from the BBC after being hurt while playing the role of a human crash test dummy during a science programme. pic.twitter.com/0miY6AvxdA
— talkRADIO (@talkRADIO) October 1, 2021
The judge explained that he “was strapped into a rig like a go-cart which was propelled along a track into a post”.
Sky News quoted her saying: “I must say that I find it astonishing that anyone thought that this exercise was a sensible idea. There was evidence that the BBC had actively sought advice, been warned of the danger, yet allowed the experiment to proceed.”
In a response, a spokesperson from the BBC said: “We keep safety measures on set under constant review and we made adjustments following the incident in 2013.”
“We acknowledge the court’s judgment in this complex case and wish Mr Stansfield the best for the future,” they added.
ShortURL ⬇
