UK woman sues a wedding venue for £150,000 after breaking her elbow on the dance floor

UK woman sues wedding venue

UK woman sues wedding venue

UK woman sues a wedding venue for £150,000 after breaking her elbow on dance floor

A UK woman is suing one of the UK’s top wedding venues for £150,000 after slipping on the dance floor and breaking her elbow. Cara Donovan, 35, claims she was in excruciating pain after slamming her elbow on the high-tech light-up dancefloor at Essex’s Leez Priory.

The mansion spreads over 40 acres of parkland. It is one of the UK’s Best Wedding Venues. The UK woman is special needs teacher. She is suing the reception firm for £150,000 after tumbling and breaking her elbow on its state-of-the-art “twinkling dance floor” in September 2018. The accident resulted in her having three operations. 

Cara claims the tables were by the edge of the floor encouraging people to dance and drink after her wedding, Metro reported. She says that she feels permanent pain in her arm. The pain impacts all areas of her everyday life at home. It has also affected her work life and has prevented her from returning to work at school.

Cara’s assertions are yet to verify as evidence by a judge

“The dance floor became wet with patches of spilt drink. Its underfloor lights made it difficult for those on the dance floor to see spilt liquid on the surface. At about 10 pm, the claimant went dancing. She slipped in the spilt drink, fell and fractured her right, dominant, arm,” Philip Goddard, Donovan’s barrister, speaks to Metro

Documents were filed before the High Court. Country House Weddings Ltd, which runs Leez Priory, was notified by the providers of the high-tech dance floor. The notification informs if beverages fall on the floor, it would constitute a tripping hazard. However, according to the case, nothing was done to prevent drinks from being brought onto the dancefloor. The wedding venue’s own commercial marketing depicted dancers with drinks on the floor.

Cara’s assertions are yet to verify as evidence by a judge. The firm’s defence to the action was not available in court papers.

Exit mobile version