Twelve burn victims who were sprayed with burning fuel and rubber from a car doing burnouts at the 2019 Red Centre Nats have settled with the organisers of the event, after they were forced to take Federal Court action.

The $3.2 million settlement will leave each of them with about $183,000 after legal costs are paid, but exact details of the distribution remain confidential.

There were 13 people who required treatment for burns at the event, four of them were flown to an intensive care unit in Adelaide, after methanol fuel from a car’s exhaust ignited at the back of the car while it was doing burnouts and flames shot through a wire fence, which was all that stood between the burnout pad and the crowd.

The ABC report in 2018 that a doctor who treated the victims said the flames would have been over 400 degrees.

On Wednesday, Justice Robert Bromwich’s approval of the settlement was published, between lead applicant, Lynelle Bouchere, and the respondents, Car Festivals Pty Ltd, the Northern Territory Major Events Company, and Summernats Pty Ltd, the companies that ran the event.

There were 11 others in the victims’ group, none named as an applicant, who took the federal Court action because they had been unable to sue for pain and suffering. Justice Bromwich said other spectators brought separate individual proceedings, which have also settled, subject to final confirmation.

Under NT laws, spectators injured by a vehicle cannot sue for negligence or seek compensation, instead they could only seek redress through the NT Motor Accidents Compensation Commission (MACC) scheme. The scheme only covers medical costs and average wages while people remain injured.

There was also an intervener, the NT Attorney General, in relation to Ms Bouchere and five of the other group members, who were paid $58,483.01 under the MACC scheme. The government will not seek to recover that money, Justice Bromwich said.

The victims were represented by Greg Walsh, who sought orders for loss or damage based on claims under the Australian Consumer Law and common law negligence.

The judgement said that of the settlement, $1 million will go towards legal costs and disbursements, with $2.2 million to be distributed to Ms Bouchere and the other group members.

Justice Bromwich said gratuitous payments totalling $163,848.97 were made by various of the respondents to all of the group members which are not sought to be recovered.

The group commenced proceedings on September 3, 2019, for the injuries sustained as spectators at the Red Centre Nats held at the Inland Drag Raceway in Alice Springs on September 3 2017.

“One of the competitor cars, which was modified to be fuelled by methanol, was driven to perform a burnout on the burnout pad,” Justice Bromwich wrote in his judgement.

“Flames were emitted, which was not permitted under the competition rules. The flames went in the direction of a spectator area which caused rubbish (including rubber detritus) on the burnout pad to catch alight and be projected towards the spectators.

“In Ms Bouchere’s case, the spectators were situated too close to the burnout pad and for whom there was no adequate physical barrier, making out a clear case of negligence.

“A range of injuries were suffered by numerous spectators, some very serious and mostly physical, but also psychological, including by Ms Bouchere and the 11 other group members.”

Justice Bromwich said complicating the matter, and with the scope to add to the overall hearing time and the risk of appeals, was the dispute between the parties, that because the injuries were caused by a car, whether the court action taken was actually precluded by the terms of the Motor Accidents (Compensation) Act, and there remained a question to the extent of loss and damage that could ultimately be proven.

Justice Bromwich said the settlement was arrived at as a compromise, reflecting the evaluation of litigation risk by all concerned and uncertainty.

“In that context, the respondents support the settlement approval upon the basis of no admission of liability,” he wrote.

“They effectively still maintain that the proceeding could well have been successfully defended, while Ms Bouchere and the other group members were clearly hopeful of doing better, perhaps much better.

“…But the true comparator was not between the final amount each will confidentially receive and what they might have received if their case had been wholly successful, but between what they will receive and the risk that they might have got nothing at all.”