Judgements

Maclachlan/McDonough vs. Williams (April 2007)
GBB acted on behalf of the defendant in a low speed impact injury case and oral evidence was provided at trial.
HHJ Bromilow was satisfied that the whiplash mechanism was not triggered and found the claimants to have “failed to prove the impact caused any foreseeable injury or loss.”
In his judgement HHJ Bromilow described the GBB evidence as “professional and fair”.

France vs FCY plc (November 2007)
In this case GBB acted for the defendant in a low speed impact injury case.
Recorder Jonathan Rose found for the claimant, however in his judgement he included the following.
“Mr. Henderson (of GBB), as befits an expert of his standing was forthright in declaring the limitations on his ability to reach a sure conclusion as to the circumstances of the accident. Those limitations included, of course, that the determination of which evidence from the drivers was found to be probative and the extent to which that was so. This is a matter for me and Mr. Henderson quite properly made no effort to intrude into this area.”
“Mr. Henderson was most careful not to intrude into the realms of medical expertise”

Williams vs Jervis (October 2008)
In this case GBB acted for the claimant to give accident reconstruction and occupant dynamics evidence in a subtle brain injury case.
Mr. Justice Roderick Evans in the High Court awarded in excess of £500,000 to the claimant.
The case involved a detailed review of the threshold for whiplash injury, the non-linear relationship between kinetic energy on vehicle occupants and increase in the speed change at the moment of impact. The GBB research played a significant role and examples from the GBB crash testing programme were shown in court.
The GBB evidence was accepted in its entirety and was acknowledged for its “research based and reasoned approach”.