Thoughts anyone? Couldn't happen to you? 

A WOMAN who had her face rebuilt during 20 operations after a horse stamped on her is taking her case to the Court of Appeal in what is seen as a test case for equestrians.

  Kara Goldsmith, 39, is suing after suffering devastating facial injuries whilst “test driving” a horse.

  The mother-of-two, from Hallgarth, Consett, County Durham, had her case against the animal’s keeper, businessman Bradley Patchcott, rejected last year by a  County Court judge, who ruled riders assume the risk of injury when they mount a horse.

  She is arguing at the Appeal Court that the judge’s approach leaves riders with too little legal protection.

  Her barrister, Richard Stead, said she was an experienced rider before nine-yearold gelding Red threw her by rearing and bucking violently before stamping on her face, during the incident in  Stanley, County Durham, in 2008.

  He said Mrs Goldsmith, who lives with husband, Ronald, and their two children aged six and ten, was trying the horse, which was being given away free after his previous owner, a female friend of Mr  Patchcott, fell from Red’s back.

  Mrs Goldsmith was returning to the stable when Red reared up, bucked violently and threw her off. Mr Stead said she has undergone 20 operations to rebuild her face, but still suffers persistent  pain.

  She is suing former pharmaceutical company boss Mr Patchcott, of Tantobie, Stanley, claiming damages for her injuries and loss of earnings.

  At Newcastle County Court, Judge Christopher Walton ruled she had assumed the risk when she chose to ride Red.

  Mr Stead argued that the approach was unfair to every horse rider, leaving them with no legal protection if their mount unexpectedly behaved “nastily or viciously”.

Mr Stead argued that Mr Patchcott knew that Red’s previous owner was getting rid of him after a fall and should have warned her the horse was tricky to control.

  Benjamin Browne QC, for Mr Patchcott, said: “Neither party contended that the horse had a known propensity to buck violently. Mrs Goldsmith consented to the risk that the horse could buck.

  Given that the behaviour of horses is unpredictable, it is submitted that the County Court judge’s approach was correct.

“Why should strict liability apply to a person who voluntarily gets on the back of a horse? If it does, you are going to get innocent owners penalised who know nothing of any vicious propensity in  their animals.”