Perjury charges for insurance assessor in karting accident

An insurance loss adjuster is to be investigated for perjury, after a go-karting operator was ordered to pay damages to a customer who suffered a permanent disability when he crashed into a tree in 2010

An insurance loss adjuster is to be investigated for perjury, after a go-karting operator was ordered to pay damages to a customer who suffered a permanent disability when he crashed into a tree in 2010.

Madame Justice Miriam Hayman handed down judgment in a case filed by the customer against Badger Karting.

The customer, aged 19 at the time, crashed into a tree after the steering wheel on the racing go-kart he had rented from the defendant came loose during a race. The court heard how employees at the track had moved the seriously injured driver into another go-kart, drove him to his parked car and left him on the ground there without calling an ambulance.

He was driven to hospital by his father, where he was found to require immediate knee surgery and was left with a 12% disability.

The injured driver argued that the defendant company was solely responsible for the injury because the kart it provided him with was defective and because the track was not equipped with any safety measures to protect drivers.

For its part, Badger Company Limited said the incident was entirely the fault of the driver’s “lack of attention or skill.”

The plaintiff had been driving too fast and had lost control of the vehicle, the company said, denying any lack of safety measures, while insisting that its employees had not acted negligently.

But none of the defendant company’s witnesses had seen the incident happen and could not comment on the dynamics of the crash.

The defence relied on a report by the motor damage assessor, Bernard Farrugia, who it had engaged, and who reported that the steering rod had sheared off – but only as a result of the impact.

However, it was found that he had filed two reports in the acts of the case, the most recent of which had omitted all the parts which imputed blame on the defendants.

This modification was intentional and aimed at accomodating the defendant company, said the driver’s lawyers.

The ommitted parts of the report stated that there were inadequate safety measures in place and that Badger Karting did not have a documented risk assessment procedure.

But a court appointed expert was not given the opportunity to examine the crashed kart as it had since been disposed of. This placed the plaintiff in a situation where it was impossible for him to directly prove the existence of a defect.

Daniel Micallef, an employee of the company, testified that the damaged cart was a write-off and had been stored for “around a month” before it was disposed of. But the evidence showed that it was examined by the insurer some three months after the incident. This fact cast a shadow on Micallef’s testimony.

Madam Justice Miriam Hayman declared the defendant solely responsible for the incident due to negligence and irresponsibility.

The court observed that there was no contestation as to the percentage disability suffered by the victim.

The total amount of damages owed to the man was calculated by the court as amounting to €49,551.

But the judge also said there were sufficient grounds to proceed against witness Bernard Farrugia for perjury, ordering the registrar of courts to see that he is prosecuted according to law.

Laywer Kris Scicluna appeared for the plaintiff, whilst lawyer Stephen Muscat represented Badger Karting in the proceedings.