Get the biggest stories sent straight to your inbox Sign up for regular updates and breaking news from WalesOnline Thank you for subscribing We have more newsletters Show me See our privacy notice Invalid Email

A tourist knocked down and injured by a Welsh catholic priest while on holiday in Rome is suing for £11m in damages.

Recruitment consultant James Edward Kennedy, 36, suffered severe head injuries and a broken back after being hit by a car driven by Father John Richard Cole whilst crossing the eternal city’s Corso Vittorio Emmanuele in January 2006.

Mr Kennedy, who suffered brain damage and is now in a wheelchair, is suing Father Cole, of Awlfryn Terrace, Penydarren, Merthyr Tydfil, along with his motor insurers.

He is seeking £11m for pain and suffering, loss of earnings and the costs of care and special equipment he will need to make the most of the rest of his life.

Mr Kennedy, of Corbridge, Northumberland, is bringing his claim through his mother, Elaine Lee, as he lacks legal capacity to sue the priest himself.

His legal team has already secured a judgement in relation to liability for the accident on the basis of 80% of a full valuation of the claim and now all that remains is for a judge to assess the amount of Mr Kennedy’s compensation package.

Mr Kennedy, formerly a keen amateur rugby and cricket player, was on holiday in Rome with university friends when he was hit by Father Cole’s Peugeot whilst crossing the road in the early hours of January 14.

Barrister John Bate-Williams, in his defence to the action, had claimed Mr Kennedy was “wearing dark clothing” and “kept no proper lookout” when stepping into the street.

He was taken to the Santo Spirito Hospital and remained in a coma for 10 months, after receiving what his counsel, Stephen Killalea QC, described as “catastrophic brain injuries”.

In his submissions, the QC told Mr Justice Stuart-Smith at London's High Court: “It is common ground that Mr Kennedy requires 24-hour care, lacks capacity, will never work and has substantial additional needs in the form of therapies and equipment.

“Discussions between the parties have however identified three major heads of loss which it is anticipated will remain incapable of agreement - care, loss of earnings and accommodation. Perhaps unsurprisingly these heads of loss are by far the biggest in financial terms,” he said.

Mr Killalea said that Mr Kennedy is fighting for a payout of up to £11m and told the judge that one of the major battlegrounds will be whether he is allowed the funds to be cared for in his own specially-adapted home rather than a less expensive residential care unit.

In May this year an interim payment was made to allow Mr Kennedy to buy an £885,000 specially adapted home in Elmfield Road, Gosforth, Newcastle, which he intends to move into within the next few months.

He told the judge that Mr Kennedy has “had to live an impoverished existence in a residential care setting for years” and that a large part of his damages award will be spent on 24-hour care in his new home.

Mr Killalea also claimed that, had Mr Kennedy been able to continue his career in recruitment, he would have been earning £100,000-a-year as a senior manager within about 10 years of the date of his accident. The barrister asked for him to be compensated for loss of earnings on that basis.

Tim Horlock QC, who is now representing the defendants, said that the purchase of the house was “a matter of significant controversy between the parties” adding that it would not be “reasonable” of the court to rule that Mr Kennedy should be funded to live in his own home.

Mr Horlock also contended that Mr Kennedy would have been likely to achieve a maximum salary of about £50,000-a-year during his career, about half the figure claimed.

The case, which was opened briefly before Mr Justice Stuart-Smith, adjourned after a short hearing for further evidence to be gathered about the amount of night-time care Mr Kennedy now needs.

The matter is expected to return to court for a full hearing in the New Year.