TV presenter has started a £ 3.9million fight against the BBC after being injured while playing the role of a ‘crash test dummy’ on a science program eight years ago .
Jeremy Stansfield, 45, of Hove, was injured while performing ‘crash tests’ in a specially designed ‘rig’ on BBC show Bang Goes The Theory in February 2013, a judge heard .
Madam Justice Yip, who heard that Mr Stansfield wanted £ 3.9million in damages, began overseeing a trial in the High Court in London today.
Mr Stansfield says he suffered spinal and brain injuries and lost more than £ 3million in potential future income.
TV presenter Jeremy Stansfield at the Royal Courts of Justice
The BBC is contesting Mr Stansfield’s claim for damages.
A lawyer representing the BBC presented the context of the dispute to the judge in a written summary of the case.
Jonathan Watt-Pringle QC has stated that Mr. Stansfield, known as “Jem”, was a freelance “inventor, writer and presenter” who became involved in television programs as an engineer and early presenter. from the 2000s.
“He worked on a number of programs and in 2009 was recruited to work as one of four co-presenters of Bang Goes The Theory, which was a popular science show on BBC television,” said explained Mr. Watt-Pringle.
“The claim arises from crash tests on February 8, 2013, in which the claimant was injured while directing an episode of Bang Goes The Theory.”
He said the ‘platform’ used for the ‘crash tests’ had been designed and built by Mr Stansfield and that engineers had rated the speed of a number of tests to be between eight mph and 11.5 mph.
Mr Watt-Pringle said Mr Stansfield’s case was that the “repeated acceleration-deceleration forces” generated by five crash tests in which he participated as a “crash test dummy” caused him damage including “soft tissue damage to structures around his spine” and “subtle brain damage”.
He said Mr Stansfield was claiming more than £ 3million in future lost income.
Mr Watt-Pringle said liability had been admitted subject to an agreed one-third reduction for “contributory negligence”.
He said the BBC disputed the claim that Mr Stansfield “suffered the injuries and suffered the alleged symptoms and losses”.
Marcus Grant, who represents Mr Stansfield, said Mr Stansfield’s case has been supported by 11 lay witnesses “to attest to his suffering and loss” over the past eight years.
He said Mr. Stansfield had been “exposed to an unusual and dangerous mechanism of injury”.
Mr Grant said the symptoms Mr Stansfield complained of fell within “a number of clinical disciplines that overlap and interact with each other” and have continued to cause “significant dysfunction”.
Mr Stansfield had identified more than £ 600,000 of work offered to him after the crash tests, but which he had to refuse on health grounds, he said.
He said after a while that “the offers were running out” as “the word got out” that Mr Stansfield was not available.
Mr Grant said there was evidence Mr Stansfield had a “unique skill set” and his career was entering a new phase.
He said Mr Stansfield had “signed up with a senior agent” and was taking “executive producer credits” which “monetized his creative ideas and writing skills.”
More about this article: Read More
This notice was published: 2021-05-17 18:07:55