Brain surgeon loses £14m Lapland holiday crash claim after texting ‘do I owe you guys a snowmobile?’
A “Adrenalin Junkie” neurosurgeon who sued £ 14 million to McLaren after a snow motorcycle accident[do] I owe you a snow motorcycle “.
The high -flying neurosurgeon Andrew Cannestra, SKİDOO, continued to make more than one career on a forest track in Lapland during a $ 23,000 luxurious break with pure McLaren Arctic experience for himself and his partner Kaitlin Mealor.
The 54 -year -old doctor, specialized in spinal cord surgery, hit a tree after negotiating a forest return and was cold for 30 minutes following the effect on February 2020.
McLaren Automotive Events Ltd, claiming that the impact of the accident on future gains exceeded £ 14 million.
However, the lawyers rejected the crime for McLaren Automotive, and when the guides did their best to provide a safe SKİDOO trip, he insisted that they carefully briefed Mr. Cannestra and his partner.
Rejecting the claim, Mr. Justice Richie said that Mr. Cannestra, which was called “addicted to adrenaline” by his partner at that time, “wants more speed” and “accidentally hit the gas instead of brakes” caused an accident.
He and his partner’s briefing before riding had been enough, “Both were in McLaren ice driving holiday. Adrenaline cannot be indifferent to the driving experience on ice in a super powerful car. Life and excitement and risk is part of it.
He continued: “He wanted more speed.
Neil Block KC – for Mr. Cannestra – he argued to the London Supreme Court that both riders were “absolute novices ve and that his guides should do more to explain the detailed order of their routes in the forest.
The surgeon fell after a pause on the journey where the guide changed the driver mode, so that the doctor’s snowfall may hit higher speeds.
The effect resulted in brain hemorrhage and severe leg injuries, which caused permanent problems with “word finding, comprehension, memory and fatigue ve and caused the previous hand tremor.
Mr. Cannestra, who won approximately £ 1.8 million a year, had to give up brain surgery, but his lawyers says that he üyle continued to work in a limited way ”.
Mr. Cannestra’s KC claimed that the lead guideline was moving at an extreme speed to safely follow a novice rider ”.
However, Matthew Chapman KC – McLaren Automotive – Mr Cannestra appears to be a competent rider and seems to be completely under the control of the snow motorcycle, and that the vehicle appears to be “willing” to switch to a faster travel mode.
In his decision, the judge sent a text to the McLaren staff after the accident: “Don’t worry… Sh*t… I asked … If I owe you a snow motorcycle or other costs. Please let me know. This was my mistake and responsibility.”
In another, he wrote: “Thank you very much for your help yesterday and thank you very much from my self -destructive snow motorcycle. Please let me know everything I am responsible for …. Transportation …. A snow motorcycle ….. etc. We had a great time and everything is fine!”
In his evidence, Mr. Cannestra insisted that post -accident messages were not accepted by his messages, and at the same time caused any problems with an exciting quest.
And despite being a passionate classic car fan with up to 33 at various times in the past, he explained that he had never competed and restricted himself with “gathering and restoring them”.
However, the judge rejected his claim and said: “The plaintiff chose to use a snow motorcycle as a part of the auxiliary fun activities provided by McLaren, while in Lapland with a four -day expensive driving experience for McLaren Road Cars on Ice.
“He followed a guide on a snowy track through the trees, but he lost control, left the track and hit a tree. He was injured. At first, he thought that he had his own mistake, apologized and offered to pay for the fragmented snow mobile phone.
“A few months later, he instructed the lawyers and at the end of July 2020, a pre -action letter of protocol was written to McLaren’s lawyers by his lawyers, claiming negligence/violation by the guide and damaging personal injuries.
“After the accident, the plaintiff said that the guidance was clinging to the gas butterfly. The plaintiff sent a message to pay his snow motorcycle, because he used his words ‘fault and responsibility’, and ‘little self -destructive snow motorcycle’.
“Neglect was rejected. The reason for the accident begged that the plaintiff had accidentally accelerated while discussing. [a turn] Instead of braking.
“I could not find the evidence of Mealor of Kaitlin as very help. He seemed to have played a role in a wing man to support his old partner.
“I was not convinced of rejecting the conversation … After the accident that the plaintiff is always addicted to an adrenaline who has been accidents.
“This conversation can be included in the context. The plaintiff bought two McLaren Road cars at the top of the list of the most powerful vehicles on the world.
“Both were on an ice holiday. Adrenaline cannot be indifferent to the driving experience on ice in a super -powerful car. There is nothing wrong with this. Life and excitement and risk is part of it.
“He wanted more speed. He had to understand that it would be more difficult and risky to be directed at higher speed. I think he understood. He also understood that they would pass through the trees.
“I think about five minutes is a suitable length for a briefing for just two customers.
“In the ambulance in the parking lot, [the guide] Pile accidentally pressed in the middle of two tours and accused the glove.
“In the hospital, a doctor accidentally hit the gas instead of braking. He thought it was the cause of the accident. [the guide] To hurry or disappear.
“He went to the second round and returned from 25 degrees, then squeezed his gas with his right hand or pushed it and hit a flat tree. Whatever it was, the use of gas would cause him to come out of the runway.”
The guide added that the driving tests were not engaged in a new “17-year-old car driver” and added: “Mature, super car and jet-ski enthusiasts who wanted to stepped safely and demand more speed. The plaintiff was preparing to leave his partner behind to increase his own taste.
The judge, “demand will be rejected and the decision will be decided for the defendant.”
