- News
- UK
- Home News
A smaller replacement yurt left guests so ‘crammed together’ that wait staff could not serve them
Richard GittinsMonday 01 December 2025 11:01 GMTComments
open image in galleryOne of the large wedding venue yurts supplied by Yorkshire Yurts Ltd (Supplied by Champion News)
Get the free Morning Headlines email for news from our reporters across the world
Sign up to our free Morning Headlines email
Sign up to our free Morning Headlines email
Email*SIGN UPI would like to be emailed about offers, events and updates from The Independent. Read our Privacy notice
An equestrian couple’s dream wedding reception was plunged into disarray after their luxury yurt collapsed just 24 hours before the ceremony.
Now, a judge has awarded them £16,000 in compensation.
Equestrian centre owner Charlotte Crane, 29, and 31-year-old William Easterby, the son of horse trainer Tim Easterby, married in June 2024.
They had planned a lavish celebration for 180 guests, enjoying “spectacular” views from a hilltop site on the bride’s father's Green Court Farm, near Guisborough, Yorkshire.
Their reception was to feature a 50-foot yurt with a fairy-lit ceiling and a “large floral display” for dining, plus a large marquee for drinks and dancing afterwards.
But on the eve of the couple's wedding, the yurt's roof structure collapsed, leaving the bride “distraught, in floods of tears and unable to sleep” and feeling her wedding had been “ruined”.
open image in galleryCharlotte Crane and William Easterby during their engagement (Supplied by Champion News)After a stressful, last-minute scramble, the couple hired a smaller dining marquee. The replacement, however, left guests so “crammed together” that waiting staff could not navigate between tables, with one describing the conditions as the “worst” they had ever had to work in.
The couple went on to sue the company which supplied the unused yurt, Yorkshire Yurts Limited, demanding a refund and compensation.
At York County Court, they have now been handed a £16,504 payout, which includes £10,000 for the stress and upset that the pair – and particularly the bride – suffered.
Giving judgment, District Judge Andrew Maccuish said the problems had caused “real distress” to Mrs Easterby on her wedding day, which is supposed to be a “once in a life time event” for a bride.
William Easterby is part of a racing dynasty, the son of renowned North Yorkshire trainer Tim Easterby and grandson of legendary racehorse trainer, Peter Easterby, who died earlier this year aged 95.
It was Peter who built up the family’s stud business in Habton Grange, near Malton, progressing to become the only trainer to have sent out over 1,000 winners in both flat and jump racing and training the acclaimed hurdler, Sea Pigeon.
After his father’s retirement, Tim Easterby took over at Habton Grange in 1996, going on to train Classic winner, Bollin Eric, who scooped the 2002 St Leger Stakes, and pulling off other wins with mounts such as Pipalong, Faye Jag, and Winter Power.
open image in galleryYorkshire Yurts was meant to supply a wedding yurt big enough for 180 guests (Supplied by Champion News)William himself rides as an amateur jockey for his dad and is a senior manager in the family business, while his bride, farmer's daughter Charlotte, owns a local equestrian centre.
After deciding to tie the knot, the couple approached local firm, Yorkshire Yurts, based in Aldfield, near Ripon, to hire a 50-foot yurt to use as a dining room, a marquee to dance in, plus a catering tent.
They paid £16,504, including a refundable £4,126 damage deposit, and by the night of Thursday 6 June the yurt and the marquee had been erected in readiness for the wedding on Saturday.
But on Friday morning, it was discovered that the yurt had “moved significantly” and “commenced to collapse”, with the struts holding up its roof being impossible to keep in place.
The couple were told by Yorkshire Yurts staff that due to “unusual” wind conditions, “the yurt was too dangerous to use if it could not be fixed”.
They were offered as a solution an alternative smaller yurt, which would have seen them having to tell half their guests they could no longer come to the reception 24 hours before the wedding.
open image in galleryCharlotte Crane and William Easterby (Supplied by Champion News)“The burden of salvaging the wedding reception thus fell to the claimants,” District Judge Andrew Maccuish, sitting at York County Court, said.
“The solution collectively decided upon by the claimant side in the 24 hours before the wedding was to utilise what was available on site that could be used and change the use of the marquee to dining, moving the bar and dance stage from it to another marquee, if one could be procured.
“An extra marquee, albeit one much smaller than the yurt, and a stand-alone trailer bar were found at exceedingly short notice for the reception's post dining events, and erected and set up on the morning of the wedding.
“A large group of some 20 people assisted with this and moving the table and chairs – and tablecloths, crockery, glasses and cutlery – to the claimants' acquired marquee.
“The foregoing does not, of course do due justice to the drama as events unfolded ... Many of the claimants' witnesses described how stressful this was.
”This final arrangement was less than perfect. In her witness statement, Ms Sarah Readman, of Nabs Nosk Catering, the wedding caterers, says that the marquee conditions for the wedding were the worst she had worked in during her 17 years in the catering industry.
“The tables ... were ... crammed together such that the guests could not move round or sit comfortably. Catering staff had to pass meals like a conveyor belt as there was no room to walk between tables. She concludes her statement by saying that it was the hardest wedding her team had to been called upon to cater.”
After the wedding, the couple sued for their money back and extra costs they faced due to the failure of the yurt, as well as damages for “the loss of enjoyment or disappointment” caused to them.
However, Yorkshire Yurts fought the case in court, claiming it was entitled to pull out due to bad conditions, with one member of staff blaming the “incredibly exposed” site and “very windy” weather.
Company director Thomas Sterne also claimed in his evidence that the yurt was usable on the day of the wedding and could have been fixed.
By then, the wind had dropped and he believed it could have been “fixed and used”, he said.
open image in galleryThe couple sued Yorkshire Yurts following the wedding (Supplied by Champion News)But the judge disagreed.
“The defendant says the yurt could be used, but that is simply not correct,” he said.
“It was contracted to deliver a yurt and in breach of the contract it failed to do so. It did not use its best endeavours to deliver and erect a yurt. The method of erection was wrong, and it then did not deploy sufficient personnel at the time to undertake remedial work.
“The poles of the yurt were erected on the wooden floor, meaning that in the wind they slipped, and as a consequence the roof spars twisted and fell.
“The yurt was not fit for the purpose for which it was to be used.
“I accept that the breaches of contract by the defendant caused real distress to the claimants, and do so on the evidence to Mrs Easterby in particular.
”Mrs Easterby's evidence was clear that she was distraught, as her plans for her wedding had been ruined. She was stressed, unable to sleep and in floods of tears.
“That is all too real and ... still raw as she gave evidence. I have also seen some of the messages passing between the bride and groom about this the night before the wedding.
“This is not the case of a jitters on the night before one's wedding. As Mrs Easterby said in her evidence, coming from farming backgrounds, the claimants are used to facing and confronting challenges and getting on with it, but not something like this.
“Unlike a spoilt holiday, a wedding is the claimants' once in a life time event. It is for them the occasion. It marks the start of their married life together and is celebrated by family and friends gathered together on the day. It is it. Something that cannot be repeated. It differs from a holiday case, because of course there can be further holidays over the following years.”
Although he acknowledged that Yorkshire Yurts gets “good reviews” and many of them five-star, “anyone may have a bad day”, said the judge, ordering the company to pay back £6,504 for the unusable yurt.
He also added an award for the upset caused, saying: “I find that an award of £10,000 will go some way to compensate the claimants, in so far as money can do that.
“That sum reflects principally the effect upon Mrs Easterby, with an allowance for Mr Easterby. The 'appropriate amount' is £10,000.
“Accordingly, there will be judgment for the claimants in the sum of £16,504.00.”
More about
WeddingYorkshireJoin our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments
