A SOMERSET dancer crushed by a mechanical tree in a bizarre accident on a film set is suing for over £300,000 compensation.

Keira Johnson, a performance artist who had worked for the Royal Opera House, suffered serious back injures after a tree mounted on a mechanical stump fell on her while filming an advert on location in Warsaw, Poland, last September.

According to documents filed at London's High Court, The Bath Dance College graduate from Oakhill, was featuring in a two-minute advert running through woodland with another actor and "knocking over trees" when the accident occurred.

A special effects team had devised a system whereby the impression of the actors smashing through the woods could be achieved by using trees mounted on a "mechanical pivot or hinge" and triggered to fall at the right time.

But Ms Johnson's lawyers argue she ended up with "serious" crush injuries to her back after "a tree that was intended to fall via a special effects mechanism fell early" and landed on her.

She is suing DDB UK Limited, trading as Adam and Eve DDB, the advertising agency that hired her, claiming "damages for personal injury in excess of £300,000".

The ad agency admits she suffered serious injuries on set but denies liability.

In the company's defence, lawyers say while DDB signed her on as "talent" for the film, it was not her employer and had nothing to do with setting up the shoot or devising, building or operating the mechanical trees.

Ms Johnson had signed a contract whereby she would be paid £350-a-day for filming, plus up to £38,000 more if the finished product was broadcast on TV and used in a print media campaign.

Claim documents from Ms Johnson's lawyers say: "This is a claim for personal injuries, pain and consequential loss arising as a result of an accident that occurred on 7 September 2022 whilst the claimant was engaged to provide services for the defendant as a performing artist.

"The defendant is an advertising agency and was the claimant's employer.

"Whilst on set, a tree that was intended to fall via a special effects mechanism fell early and landed on the claimant, causing serious injury.

"The facts of the accident itself evidence the defendant's negligence."

But lawyers for the ad agency say that after signing on the "talent" and devising the concept of the shoot, they handed responsibility for it over to a "well-established multi-award winning film production company".

"Whilst the defendant devised the concept of two people running through and knocking over trees, (the production company) decided upon the concept of using a mechanical pivot or hinge technique to lower trees as the actors ran through them, rather than, for example, using CGI," say the ad agency's lawyers.

Barrister James Medd, for DDB, says the production company "was in control of the shooting of the scene and the claimant acted under (the production company's) direction".

Describing the day of the incident, he says Ms Johnson and the other lead actor first performed six rehearsals "with the claimant and the other lead actor running through the set and simulating their actions but with no falling trees".

There were then four takes "with the claimant and other lead artist running through the set with falling trees being released remotely by the SFX department and the camera following them".

"The accident occurred on the fifth take of this profile action....the claimant touched the first tree and the second tree fell early, landed on the claimant’s back and caused her serious injury. The first tree fell just after the second tree."

The barrister adds: "It is denied that the defendant had any relevant 'level of control' over the filming location or what was done there.

"The defendant does not have personal knowledge of precisely how the device which enabled the trees to fall was designed and manufactured.

"It is admitted that the scene gave rise to risks, but denied that those risks were such that they could not be obviated or controlled by the exercise of reasonable skill and care by a competent production company and/or by competent persons acting under its control.

"It is denied that shooting the scene was exceptionally dangerous whatever precautions were taken.

"The defendant does not know the cause of the second tree falling at the wrong time.

"However, it would appear most probable that it was either as a result of the individual whose responsibility it was to press the buttons to lower the tree pressing the wrong button or buttons, or pressing a button or buttons at the wrong time or as a result of a malfunction in the equipment designed to control the tree-lowering process.

"The defendant admits that the accident ought never to have occurred and avers that it was in no way the fault of the claimant.

"(But) the defendant denies that it is responsible in law or in fact for either of these causes.

"It was not for the defendant to provide or implement risk assessments.

"The defendant relies on the fact that risk assessments were provided by (the production company).

"If one or any of these risk assessments was/were inadequate then that was due to the negligence of (the production company) or its sub-contractors.

"Whilst it is again admitted that the claimant has suffered serious personal injuries, it is denied that these were caused by the defendant’s negligence."

The exact nature of the "serious" injuries suffered by Ms Johnson and the product that the film was set to promote were not set out in the documents currently available from the court.

DDB UK Limited is the sole defendant to the claim and the production company is not a party to the action.