Shakey suing MSV / BSB

[Hungrymc]

I’m old enough to remember how he rode on the road for entertainment purposes.
It’s hard to see him as a champion of increased safety standards.

[Bob_Defly]

A500leroy said:

Bob_Defly said:

Tam_Mullen said:

It will be interesting to see what happens this weekend, you wouldn't have thought BSB/MSV will be overly happy with him being on site to present the coverage.

They could refuse him entry in case he might trip and fall over.

Im there on Friday, i'll see if I can find him.

Stick your foot out.

[Red9zero]

Hungrymc said:

I’m old enough to remember how he rode on the road for entertainment purposes.
It’s hard to see him as a champion of increased safety standards.

He was being a bit naughty on the Late Brake Show videos he did. If he does get his money, where would it leave the TT ? I assume air fences round the entire course ?

[2fast748]

Being reported on crash.net:

https://www.crash.net/bsb/news/1048482/1/shane-byr...

It seems the case is live as we speak and it seems to revolve around him being a great rider (he went round the corner fine on the lap before his crash!?!)

[DarthtaterM16]

Hungrymc said:

I’m old enough to remember how he rode on the road for entertainment purposes.
It’s hard to see him as a champion of increased safety standards.

Me too!

The champagne thing had me questioning him but like I said before gave him the benefit of doubt.

[egor110]

Tango13 said:

PorkInsider said:

I guess he's got an expensive lifestyle and his wife - Petra Morgan - is no longer a...what's the polite term..? "model" bringing in any money either.

So perhaps totally down to the hope of a one-off payout that's going to see him alright for a while, even if it does alienate him from the entire racing community.

Having googled pictures of her there's probably a joke to be made about 'airbags' if I could be bothered to think about one.

It will be interesting to find out if Byrne raised concerns about track safety before riding? That said, if he did and still rode then I'm sure the lawyers will argue that by riding on track he was accepting the level of risk.

His wife was a pretty good ultra runner , not sure if she does quite as much now .

[Rene Souffle]

I remember seeing she had a botched eye operation a few years ago.
Nearly blinded her and she was lucky to have made a full recovery by all accounts.

On the topic of Shakeys crash. I seem to recall it was just a regular trackday by MSV. Not a test day by BSB or similar. Thats why it was just him a two crew guys in a van.

If the argument is for all tracks to have air fencing, that’s going to whack a serious premium on trackdays for cars and bikes I imagine.

[Mr Tidy]

That's sad news as I was always a fan of Shakey. Maybe living in Sittingbourne for a while was a factor, but his BSB titles spoke volumes for his ability.

But let's face it most tickets to spectate at motorsport events tell you motorsports are dangerous, so surely the competitors know that too?

If he's skint I'd rather chip in to a crowdfund or whatever than have his legal case succeed.

[trickywoo]

Rene Souffle said:

On the topic of Shakeys crash. I seem to recall it was just a regular trackday by MSV. Not a test day by BSB or similar. Thats why it was just him a two crew guys in a van.
.

It was an official test but I think the track day implications are the same.

I hope they show the time he took Rutter out at Snet as evidence he very much did make mistakes.

[Rough101]

I’ve never raced bikes, but this seems very ill judged and could ruin the sport for others. He doesn’t have anyone else to blame for not staying on the black bits.

I could see the point if:

There was usually an air fence here but it was removed with warning
There was a serious track defect that sent him into it that was there before the session opened
Whatever barrier was there was plainly damaged or in a poor condition
The circuit had no safety assessment at all
The circuit was advertised as a soft play facility.

[Nick Forest]

crofty1984 said:

Nick Forest said:

I would imagine the circuit owners and others defence is simply one of Volenti non fit injuria?

Is that a cocktail?

Volenti non fit iniuria (or injuria) (Latin: "to a willing person, injury is not done") is a Roman legal maxim and common law doctrine which states that if someone willingly places themselves in a position where harm might result, knowing that some degree of harm might result, they are not able to bring a claim against the other party in tort or delict. Volenti applies only to the risk which a reasonable person would consider them as having assumed by their actions; thus a boxer consents to being hit, and to the injuries that might be expected from being hit, but does not consent to (for example) his opponent striking him with an iron bar, or punching him outside the usual terms of boxing. Volenti is also known as a "voluntary assumption of risk".

…I knew my 3 years of studying contract law weren’t wasted, it’s one of the few bits I remember these days!

[Forester1965]

Let it go through the courts then judge whether the action has merits. If it doesn't, it doesn't. If it does, accept it.

People have short memories. Many motorsport deaths and injuries of the last wouldn't have happened with better safety and better safety wouldn't have happened without campaigners demanding it.

If Byrne by his actions (even if he loses) makes organisers put more thought into safety, is that a bad thing?

If people are sufficiently into Motorsport they'll tolerate paying slightly more for tickets or TV passes if it means fewer riders or drivers are seriously injured or killed.

Yes, racers accept what they do is dangerous, but it's still their career and life and they don't sign up to take more risk than is necessary. Nobody in their workplace should be put at unnecessary risk.

[crofty1984]

Nick Forest said:

crofty1984 said:

Nick Forest said:

I would imagine the circuit owners and others defence is simply one of Volenti non fit injuria?

Is that a cocktail?

Volenti non fit iniuria (or injuria) (Latin: "to a willing person, injury is not done") is a Roman legal maxim and common law doctrine which states that if someone willingly places themselves in a position where harm might result, knowing that some degree of harm might result, they are not able to bring a claim against the other party in tort or delict. Volenti applies only to the risk which a reasonable person would consider them as having assumed by their actions; thus a boxer consents to being hit, and to the injuries that might be expected from being hit, but does not consent to (for example) his opponent striking him with an iron bar, or punching him outside the usual terms of boxing. Volenti is also known as a "voluntary assumption of risk".

…I knew my 3 years of studying contract law weren’t wasted, it’s one of the few bits I remember these days!

That was really interesting, thank you.

[e600]

I suspect you can make all race circuits safer and then there is the Isle of Man.

[srob]

Forester1965 said:

Let it go through the courts then judge whether the action has merits. If it doesn't, it doesn't. If it does, accept it.

People have short memories. Many motorsport deaths and injuries of the last wouldn't have happened with better safety and better safety wouldn't have happened without campaigners demanding it.

If Byrne by his actions (even if he loses) makes organisers put more thought into safety, is that a bad thing?

If people are sufficiently into Motorsport they'll tolerate paying slightly more for tickets or TV passes if it means fewer riders or drivers are seriously injured or killed.

Yes, racers accept what they do is dangerous, but it's still their career and life and they don't sign up to take more risk than is necessary. Nobody in their workplace should be put at unnecessary risk.

I broadly agree, but as others have mentioned Jonathan Palmer is a real advocate for safety so he's not someone I'd expect would deliberately cut corners. Take a look at Snetterton or Cadwell before MSV compared to now...

[smifffymoto]

The assumption is Palmer has willingly improved Cadwell and Snetterton,he may have thought “ If I don’t improve the safety of these circuits,I might get my arse handed to me in the courts. FFS,I could have bought a new helicopter “.

[Forester1965]

srob said:

I broadly agree, but as others have mentioned Jonathan Palmer is a real advocate for safety so he's not someone I'd expect would deliberately cut corners. Take a look at Snetterton or Cadwell before MSV compared to now...

I don't take the claim as an accusation Jonathan Palmer doesn't care about safety. It's a claim that more could have been done on one corner. That claim might be right, it might not (we'll see as the case progresses). Nothing wrong with the courts examining the issue in my opinion.

[PurpleTurtle]

IANAL but I think he's flying a kite here. Will be surprised if he wins this case.

If I were SB, given the extent of his injuries, I would be grateful that a) I was alive and b) still able to walk. Anything else really is a bonus.

https://www.motorcyclenews.com/sport/british-super...

I'm sure he's hugely disappointed at it being the end of his racing career but crashes like this really are an occupational hazard. Many riders don't get so lucky.

He even says this in his own biography, Unshakeable. Awkward.

[Biker 1]

My 3p worth:

I can't understand why Shakey is doing this so long after the crash.
What does he stand to gain if he wins? Does he really need the cash? Surely he knows the potential implications including the possibility of closing tracks due to insurance costs etc?
Doesn't make any sense - the sport that he apparently cares so deeply about could be about to take a major hammering.

[PorkInsider]

Biker 1 said:

My 3p worth:

I can't understand why Shakey is doing this so long after the crash.
What does he stand to gain if he wins? Does he really need the cash? Surely he knows the potential implications including the possibility of closing tracks due to insurance costs etc?
Doesn't make any sense - the sport that he apparently cares so deeply about could be about to take a major hammering.

Sums it up.

As per earlier posts, presumably he's running short of cash?

I can't see how this ends well for him.

If he loses, he's gained a dent to his reputation (imo).

If he wins he's going to alienate an awful lot of people - racers, fans and circuit owners alike.