David Knifton KC and Helen Shakespeare win 20-year battle for compensation

July 30, 2025

At a landmark hearing before the High Court in Leeds this week, David Knifton KC, instructed by Helen Shakespeare of Thompsons Solicitors, has secured approval of a £2.9m settlement on behalf of a claimant who suffered a severe brain injury in a road traffic accident 20 years ago, when he was aged 8.

The claimant, known only as TWD for legal reasons, was struck by a bus as he ran across a road in Grimsby on the approach to a zebra crossing in June 2005, resulting in a traumatic brain injury.  A police report concluded that the bus driver had been travelling within the 30mph speed limit, and that the claimant had run into the carriageway without looking, giving the driver insufficient time to avoid a collision.  Although TWD’s mother approached a local firm of solicitors, she was advised that any claim had no prospect of success.  It was only when her son developed epilepsy as a teenager, causing his schooling to be seriously disrupted due to bullying, that she consulted Helen Shakespeare at Thompsons, who set about investigating the claim in greater detail.

Faced with a firm denial of liability by the operators of the bus, she instructed David Knifton KC, who advised that the presence of numerous youngsters on the pavement near the crossing indicated that the bus driver’s assessed speed of 28mph was excessive, and that he ought to have slowed to around 20mph.  An accident reconstruction report concluded from skid marks at the scene that the bus was travelling at around 32mph prior to braking, and that TWD would have been visible trotting towards the carriageway for around 2.5 to 3.5 seconds prior to impact.  Had the driver reduced his approach speed to around 24mph, or braked upon seeing the boy moving towards the carriageway, the collision would have been avoided altogether.

Despite being made aware of such findings, the Defendants maintained their denial of liability following the issue of proceedings, and issued a Part 20 claim against TWD’s mother, alleging that she had negligently allowed her son to go out unsupervised.  It was only at the stage of exchange of witness statements in June 2019 that liability was finally admitted.  As a result, an interim payment to fund a programme of rehabilitation and support could not be obtained until TWD was aged 22.  The experts in neurological rehabilitation agreed that this delay in implementing rehabilitation had influenced TWD’s recovery, and that the lack of support at school had affected his social and educational outcome.

TWD had made a remarkably good physical recovery from the effects of his brain injury, but had developed epilepsy (now controlled on medication), total loss of hearing in the left ear, and cognitive problems with memory, attention and executive function.  As a result, he has very low self-esteem and confidence, is highly anxious, avoids social interaction and is very vulnerable.  He lacks capacity to litigate and to manage his financial affairs, and has been unable to sustain employment.

Having effectively grown into his injury, TWD lacked insight into his cognitive and behavioural difficulties.  Despite the implementation of high quality input from a clinical psychologist, occupational therapist, physiotherapist, case manager and rehabilitation assistants, with the aim of optimizing his behaviour and use of routines so as to engage him in a wider range of social and vocational activities, he struggled to accept and understand the benefits of such support, and was frequently resistant to it.

Whilst there was a broad measure of agreement between the various experts as to the nature and extent of TWD’s brain injury, they disagreed on the level of future support that was reasonably required, or that he would be willing to accept.  At a JSM in 2023, it quickly became apparent that there was a wide gulf between the parties’ valuations.  Shortly thereafter, the Defendants made Part 36 and Calderbank offers of £1.5m and £1.72m, which, due to his anxiety, TWD felt under pressure to accept, contrary to advice from his legal team.  Fortunately, at a hearing in August 2023, HHJ Gosnell accepted advice from David Knifton KC that the offers were inadequate, and refused to approve settlement, on the basis that it was not in the Claimant’s best interests to do so.

Although the case appeared destined to proceed to a contested 10-day trial in September 2025, the parties agreed to attend a mediation in April 2025 with James Rowley KC.  His skilled input resulted in the Defendants making a substantially-increased settlement offer of £2.9m, very close to David’s valuation of £3m, and well over £1m higher than their previous maximum offer.

Recognising the inherent difficulties and uncertainties in evaluating cases of this nature, HHJ Gargan was “wholly satisfied” that it was appropriate for the settlement to be approved, expressing the hope that it would enable the Claimant to have “a happy and fulfilled future.”

Commenting on the settlement. Helen Shakespeare, Partner and Principal Serious Injury Solicitor at Thompsons, said: “This case highlights the significant impact that a prolonged denial of liability can have on injured individuals and their families.  The defendant’s refusal to engage meaningfully in settlement negotiations until very late in the day further prolonged that distress for TWD. TWD’s mother demonstrated enormous tenacity in ensuring that TWD sought specialist legal advice on liability allowing this to be resolved after years of denial and despite earlier legal advice that TWD’s case was unlikely to be successful.  The delay in securing early rehabilitation and support undoubtedly affected TWD’s long-term recovery and quality of life.  Despite everything, TWD and his family have shown remarkable strength and dignity throughout this process, and I am delighted that he now has the opportunity to move forward with the support he deserves.” 

David Knifton KC added: “I am delighted finally to have secured the right outcome in this long-running case.  If only the Defendants had been willing to fund rehabilitation or to negotiate a suitable compromise at a much earlier stage, TWD’s recovery would have been much better.  As it is, he and his mum deserve nothing but praise for having the courage and resilience to see the case through to its conclusion, despite so many setbacks along the way.  It has been a real privilege to represent them.  I wish him every success for the future.”