Golf cart tragedy: how a friendly game of golf led to a catastrophic brain injury claim

Posted: 12/02/2025

Personal injury partner Warren Collins reviews a recent case, in which a seemingly innocuous golf cart accident resulted in a catastrophic brain injury, followed by the issue of High Court proceedings and a multi-million pound settlement. 

He may have been well into his late 80s, but Freddie (not his real name) was far from a sedentary life of ‘pipe and slippers’. Long retired as a principal architect designing prestige homes, he continued to lead a full and active life. His intellect and curious mind were kept at full capacity by his enjoyment of debating current affairs and his daily routine of completing The Times’ crossword. He was physically active too, whether that was maintaining his beautiful home in Notting Hill, chopping firewood in his garden, his rambling trips to Ireland, fishing expeditions with friends and family, or a regular round of 18 holes at his favourite golf club. 

One day at the club, during the summer of 2023, started like any other. Freddie met up with a group of three friends at the first tee for a game of ‘four-ball’. One of his friends had recently injured his leg, and, being rather unsteady on his feet, decided to use one of the club’s golf buggies to drive around the course rather than walk. 

Freddie was taken by complete surprise to see the buggy hurtling towards him; he was struck full on and knocked backwards onto the grass. Having got up and dusted himself down, he decided he should withdraw from the game. Freddie went into the clubhouse for a cup of tea before feeling well enough to drive himself home. 

By the time Freddie returned home, he was feeling rather unwell. He duly obeyed his partner as she had suggested he take a nap and rest for the afternoon. But Freddie soon began feeling worse, and the paramedics were called. Within hours of the accident on the golf course, he was admitted to St Mary’s Hospital in London, having been diagnosed with very extensive and widespread bleeding to the brain. 

Freddie was admitted to intensive care and then high dependency care. He had been left with major cognitive and executive deficits and in a low state of consciousness. He was immobile, incontinent, and with little speech or swallow function. The temporary tracheostomy subsequently became permanent, and feeding was through a PEG (peri-epigastric) tube. The outlook was grim, and end of life decisions were being considered and suggested by the doctors. 

The family sought assistance from the personal injury team at Penningtons Manches Cooper. A partner and a paralegal visited Freddie and his son that week. There were a number of issues to resolve:

Capacity

It was very clear right from the outset that Freddie lacked capacity to litigate and to manage his financial affairs. We explained to Freddie’s son the role of a litigation friend essentially meant that he would step into his father’s shoes for the purposes of receiving legal advice and giving instructions. As Freddie had previously executed a lasting power of attorney, we were able to avoid the necessity of making an application for a financial deputyship – but had such an application been necessary, our experts in the Court of Protection team would have been available to assist.

Insurance issues

While we were confident that Freddie had a good claim in law against the driver of the golf buggy, given the potential    value of the claim, we had to satisfy ourselves that there would be an insurance policy to meet it. We sometimes find that claimants have very good claims in law but there is no insurance cover for a defendant to meet the claim. 

Here, we had the opposite problem. We presented a claim to the golf club – they had a block policy that covered the drivers of buggies. However, that was not the end of the matter, because the golf buggy rental company also held a block insurance policy (with a different insurer) that covered the use of the same buggy. This presented a problem, because where there are competing insurance policies from different insurers, it is a matter for them to determine which is the principal policy that will meet the claim. 

The insurers (as one might expect) were seeking to blame each other. Freddie appeared to be piggy in the middle. The problem may have been compounded even further by the fact that the driver of the buggy also had his own household contents policy that covered public liability, but that issue became irrelevant because his household insurers were the same insurers as those covering the club.

After we issued proceedings in the High Court, the golf club’s insurers agreed that they would deal with the claim (and determine their dispute with the other insurers separately).

Neuro-rehabilitation 

Freddie may have been very seriously injured and in his late 80s, but his family were committed to making his life as fulfilling and as comfortable as possible. Through the legal process, we were able to persuade the insurers to fund the provision of an independent brain injury case manager, who in turn secured a place for Freddie at a specialist neuro-rehabilitation care home with the provision of speech and language therapy, occupational therapy, and physiotherapy. 

The personal injury claim

While therapies were ongoing, we secured independent expert evidence in relation to neuro-rehabilitation medicine, neurology, speech and language therapy, physiotherapy, care and case management. This expert evidence enabled us to secure substantial interim payments and (given the ongoing insurance issues which needed to be resolved) to issue High Court proceedings. 

The issue of proceedings concentrated the minds of the insurers. The big question in this case was whether Freddie would remain in the state funded neuro-rehabilitation centre, move to a privately funded hospital for specialist care (at a cost of some £1 million a year), or return to an adapted home with a care package in place. The move home idea appealed to the family, but the reality is that Freddie’s condition (and his limited life expectancy) did not make this either practically or financially viable.

Settlement

The parties agreed to meet to discuss settlement. After a long day of negotiations, a settlement of damages and legal costs just shy of eight figures was reached and subsequently approved by the court.

Return to news headlines