Mountain Clients

Hedley v Cuthbertson – North Face of the Tour Ronde, July 1990

On June 20 1997, a Judge found against (BMG) guide Dave ‘Smiler’ Cuthbertson in a negligence case brought against him by six year old Daniel Woodroofe Hedley. The case concerned an accident on the North face of the Tour Ronde in July 1990. Cuthbertson was leading his client Gerry Hedley when he (Cuthbertson) fell. The single ice screw belay placed by Cuthbertson failed. Hedley was killed. In what turns out to be a recurring feature of these accidents, the guide survived.

Since this High Court judgement the BMC has been working to counter the “ill conceived suggestion” that any standard procedure exists for climbing alpine routes of this type and to stress that any one of a range of belaying methods may have been appropriate in the circumstances. [Like placing 2 or even 3 ice screws].

I quote from the BMC response shortly after the court decision:

“If a precedent is set basing the concept of negligence on a failure to follow procedure then this will seriously affect the way in which people, both amateur and professionals, climb. We know [really?] there is no set procedure for climbing [?] particularly alpinism, and that the variety of circumstances encountered puts the onus entirely on the judgement of the individual [the client presumably cannot make such judgements]. Judgement and experience, not the rulebook, are used to make the choices that minimise the risk [like two ice screws at least] that climbers [clients] are exposed to. In any mountaineering accident it is normally possible to trace back to a point and say if only those involved had done this or that the accident might have been avoidable: but it is wrong to think that because an accident has occurred someone has to be at fault or even that the decisions made were necessarily bad ones. The BMC is currently pulling together opinion as to the implications of the case and a full review will appear in Summit 7.”

The judge made it quite clear in his judgement that, having heard expert evidence on both sides, Cuthbertson was negligent because he used only a single ice screw in the belay that failed and caused the fall. He reached this decision notwithstanding that Counsel for Cuthbertson had argued the case pretty much along the lines outlined in the BMC reaction to the case, namely that owing to the surrounding circumstances of the climb and the conditions prevailing at the time, Cuthbertson was entitled to use his experience and judgement to come to a decision to use only a single ice screw in the belay. The judge held that the “2 ice screws or more” rule should not have been departed from in this case.

From the court transcript, Mr Justice Dyson concluded: “…I prefer the opinion expressed by Mr Fyffe [a member of the Association of British Mountain Guides appearing as an expert for Hedley] to those of Mr Harper and Mr Cuthbertson. Mr Cuthbertson made a serious mistake [and yet had been guiding during the seven years from 1990] with the tragic consequences which will live in his memory for the rest of his life”.

The BMC, of course, know better:

Mr Hedley’s widow and the young son that he never saw waited 7 years for compensation for the loss suffered as a result of the loss of a husband and father. Even then, an appeal was considered; Cuthberton was urged to consider an appeal; there were those who were prepared to support financially an appeal against the widow and her son.

At the time of the avoidable fatal accident to Gerry Hedley, the BMG were advertising ‘Safe Guarantees.’

They had been advertising: ‘Adventure with Security, we have a comprehensive insurance scheme – why chance everything on anything less?’ That false advertising by the BMG was removed from High Mountain Sports (the official magazine of the BMC) in 1997 by the Advertising Standards Authority, at the behest of the Association of Mountain Clients. The BMC, had made no attempt to remove that false advertising itself even though the BMC had offered to give ‘full publicity’ to any problems that another, independent guide, may have had – cronyism at its worst.

Not everyone felt sympathy for Mr Hedley’s widow. An appeal was actually considered after the judge found in favour of Mrs Hedley in 1997. Apparently, it mattered not that she had struggled on as a single parent for – seven years. It mattered not, that vital information had taken more than three years to arrive from Chamonix thus pushing the case out-of time. Fortunately, she was able to carry-on and sue in her sons name.