A primary school teacher has been unsuccessful in her £60,000 legal claim against the adventure park operator Go Ape, after a judge determined that activities at such venues naturally involve inherent risks that participants must accept.
The Incident and Injuries
Rosemary Mountain, a 50-year-old teacher, suffered what was described as a severe fracture while descending a slide at Go Ape's Black Park adventure site near Slough in February 2019. The incident occurred on a structure known as the 'Big Bounce', a netted fabric tube slide measuring between 10 and 12 metres in length, located within the Nets Kingdom area designed primarily for children aged three to twelve.
During her descent, Mrs Mountain's trainer became entangled, resulting in her leg breaking in three distinct places. She described the limb as becoming 'floppy' and bending at an alarming 45-degree angle. The injury was so severe that she had to be carefully extracted from the netting at the slide's base before being transported to hospital for emergency treatment.
Legal Proceedings and Claim
Mrs Mountain, who teaches year one and two pupils, initiated legal proceedings against Adventure Forest Ltd, which trades as Go Ape. She sought £60,000 in compensation, arguing that the slide in question was 'too dangerous' and 'not reasonably safe for operation.' It was noted during proceedings that the specific slide involved had since been replaced by the operator.
She recounted to Central London County Court that the accident happened during a half-term visit with her husband and young children. The family had decided to use the slide as a convenient exit route, with her husband and children going first. Mrs Mountain described a terrifying experience: 'It was very fast and the first part is just a freefall. My foot just got snagged in some sort of material at the side of the slide and dragged behind me.'
The Defence and Court Ruling
Representatives for Go Ape robustly defended the claim, denying all liability. They emphasised that the Nets Kingdom installation was created by industry specialists and underwent regular safety inspections. Crucially, they highlighted that Mrs Mountain had signed a disclaimer acknowledging the risk of injury before entering the area.
Judge Luke Ashby ultimately dismissed the claim. In his ruling, he stated: 'There are inherent risks in undertaking adventure activities in adventure parks even when following instructions.' He acknowledged Go Ape as a reputable, household-name operator that maintains professional standards, noting that the company runs numerous adventure parks across the UK.
The judge referenced incident data, revealing that prior to Mrs Mountain's accident, there had been approximately eight or nine reported instances where individuals caught their feet on the same slide, out of an estimated 100,000 uses. He characterised these as 'a handful of minor incidents' before this more serious event.
Wider Implications and Social Context
Judge Ashby's ruling touched upon the broader social utility of adventure parks, stating: 'It is socially desirable for adventure parks to be able to operate... There is a social utility to these types of activities.' He clarified that this does not absolve operators from their duty of care, but within that framework, certain inherent risks remain.
He concluded: 'It was a nasty injury and it was a very unpleasant accident, but that is what it was. This claim is dismissed.'
Impact on the Claimant
Mrs Mountain described herself as previously an 'outdoorsy adventurous person.' The consequences of the fracture have been life-altering. She underwent extensive surgery and continues to suffer from chronic pain. She expressed doubt about ever returning to running or her former active lifestyle, marking a significant personal loss beyond the financial claim.
Reflecting on her expectations, she told the court: 'We signed to say there's a risk of bumps and scrapes, but not this sort of injury. It says on the description that it's suitable for three-year-olds, so I didn't expect to break my leg in the way that I did.' This sentiment underscores the difficult balance between assumed risk and the severity of actual outcomes in recreational environments.
