watson v british boxing board of control 2001 case watson v british boxing board of control 2001 case

This is an argument which might appeal to boxing enthusiasts, but would not be accepted by the British Medical Association. On the law relied upon by the Judge, this was all that Mr Watson needed to succeed. for the existence of a duty of care were present. Resuscitation equipment should be at ringside along with person(s) capable of using it". radio ii) The Board assumed responsibility for determining the details of the medical care and facilities which would be provided by way of immediate treatment of those who received personal injuries while taking part in the activity. The child's parents will seldom be in a position to know whether the psychologist's advice was sound or not. "What emerges is that, in addition to the forceability of damage, necessary ingredients in any situation giving rise to a duty of care are that there should exist between the party owing the duty and the party to whom it is owed, a relationship characterised by the law as one of "proximity" or "neighbourhood" and that the situation should be one in which the court considers it fair, just and reasonable that the law should impose a duty of a given scope upon the one party for the benefit of the other". Sharpe v Avery [1938] 4 All E.R. 3. A press release issued in the 1980's', stated: "In the last 20 years, the medical protection of British professional boxers has become the Board's main raison d' trethrough its Medical Committee set up in 1950, it has provided British professional boxing with an unrivalled set of medical safety checks and balances.". c) The rule that if a fight is stopped by the referee or a boxer is counted out, the boxer's licence is suspended for at least 28 days and until the boxer is certified fit to box by a doctor. "In Barnett v Chelsea & Kensington Management Committee [1969] 1 Q.B. that the negligence alleged fell into the category of directly causing foreseeable personal injury, both he and Swinton Thomas L.J. 14. If PFA was not liable in negligence, the Plaintiff might be left without a remedy against anyone. Where a blow to the head results in immediate impairment or loss of consciousness, this is normally the result of temporary deformation of the brain caused by acceleration or deceleration of movement of the head. In 1991 it was also the practice to infuse with Manitol, though as I understand it this is no longer the case today. He should certainly carry an aphygomamometer and stethoscope, an ophthalmoscope, an auroscope, a patella hammer, a Brooks airway and a padded spatula in case of a rate occurrence of fitting and the need to establish an airway. In accordance with normal practice, the medical officers for the contest were nominated by the Southern Area Council. It is not so much that responsibility is assumed as that it is recognised or imposed by the law.". . Throughout these contests the boxers' performance should be noted and any untoward medical problems arising should be reported to the Area Council or Board. In Watson v British Boxing Board of Control (2000), the claimant was the famous professional boxer Michael Watson. PDF COLLECTION OF SPORTS-RELATED CASE-LAW - Olympic Games Ian Kennedy J. equated the formulation of rules and regulations with the giving of advice and these decisions are of relevance in this context. This was drawn to the attention of the duty Petty Officer, who organised a stretcher, had the rating carried to his cabin and placed on his bunk in the recovery position, in a coma. It made provision in its Rules for the medical precautions to be employed and made compliance with these Rules mandatory. In Caparo Plc v Dickman [1990] 2 AC 605, and in many subsequent cases, the House of Lords and this Court have approved the approach to the development of the law of negligence recommended by Brennan J. in the High Court of Australia in Sutherland Shire Council v Heyman (1985) 60 A.L.R. Many of the matters considered under the heading of proximity are also relevant to the question of whether it is fair, just and reasonable to impose a duty of care in this case. In Marc Rich & Co v. Bishop Rock Ltd [1996] AC 211 a classification surveyor had surveyed a vessel laden with cargo and given it a clean bill of health. The Judge went on to review such statistical evidence as there was in relation to the frequency of occurrence of head injuries in boxing and observed that there had been no evidence to suggest that the Board considered and balanced the difficulty of providing the adequate response to the risks of head injury against their frequency of occurrence and severity of outcome. rejected the submission that any negligence on the part of Mr Usherwood was only an indirect cause of the crash. In fact the Board had required a third doctor to be present and that an ambulance should be in attendance. No reasonably competent educational psychologist, exercising reasonable skill and care, would have given such advice. 101. I consider that the Judge was entitled to conclude that there was in this case reliance by Mr Watson on the exercise of skill and care by the Board in looking after his safety. The most material part of this reads: "The Senior Medical Officer shall arrange for full and adequate resuscitation equipment (including intubation and ventilation equipment) to be available at the ringside of the venue. In the event, without explanation, he was not tendered as a witness and objection was taken to the use of his witness statement. 47. Michael Watson was injured in a boxing match supervised by the British Boxing Board of Control (BBBofC or BBBC), which was expected to . These facts bring the Board into close proximity with each individual boxer who contracts with a promoter to fight under the Board's rules. By this time, however, he had sustained serious brain damage. Considerations of insurance are not relevant. Once brought into contact with the plaintiffs, the professionals owed a duty properly to exercise their professional skills in dealing with their `patients', the plaintiffs. Despite this statement, Ian Kennedy J. suggested that where there was a potential for physical injury there was no need to go beyond the test of foreseeability in deciding whether a duty of care existed, relying on Perrett v. Collins [1998] 255. A boxer member of the Board would not be aware of the details of all these matters. The distinction between negligent misstatement and other forms of conduct ceases to be legally relevant, although it may have a factual relevance to foresight or causation. But the fact that the carrying out of the retainer involves contact with and relationship with the child cannot alter the extent of the duty owed by the professionals under the retainer from the local authority. This passage was approved by Lord Steyn when the case reached the House of Lords [1996] AC 211 at 235. Next Mr. Walker argued that if the Board had made its Rules pursuant to a statutory power it would be tolerably clear that it could not be held liable in negligence in relation to the manner in which it chose to exercise its discretion. Mr Walker's challenge to these findings was based on a single point. Since 1929 the Board has been and continues to be the sole controlling body regulating professional boxing in the United Kingdom. When carrying out the assessment and advising the education authority, did the psychologist owe a duty of care to the child? 34. The Board called to give evidence Mr Peter Richards, a Consultant Neuro-Surgeon with Charing Cross Hospital between 1987 and 1995. In Caparo v Dickman at p.617 Lord Bridge considered a series of decisions of the Privy Council and the House of Lords in relation to the duty of care in negligence and summarised their effect as follows:-. at p.262 which I have set out above. Creating a unique profile web page containing interviews, posts, articles, as well as the cases you have appeared in, greatly enhances your digital presence on search engines such Google and Bing, resulting in increased client interest. Ormrod L.J. The owner of the aircraft took off, with the Plaintiff onboard as a passenger. While I do not agree with Mr Mackay's submission that Perrett v Collins provides a close analogy to the present case, I do find helpful the formulation of legal principle by Hobhouse L.J. Moreover, it is clear that no such duty of care exists, even though there may be close physical proximity, simply because one party is a doctor and the other has a medical problem which may be of interest to both". In support of that proposition Mr. Walker relied upon, 79. I shall revert to the details of this when I come to consider the question of breach. Nearly half an hour elapsed between the end of the fight and the time that he got there. Boxing could not, however, have survived as a legal sport without strict regulation, one aim of which is to limit the injuries inflicted in the ring. This increases the oxygen in the blood and reduces the level of carbon dioxide. Of these, the vast majority were semi-professional. 31. If Mr Watson has no remedy against the Board, he has no remedy at all. Please log in or sign up for a free trial to access this feature. The Board had, or had available, medical expertise. From at least 1959 the Board kept under review the medical safeguards that should be provided at a boxing contest in the light of developing medical knowledge, or purported so to do. The latter have the role of protecting the public in general against risks, which they play no part in creating. The conduct of the activity of professional boxing carries with it, for the small body of men that take part in it, the need for the provision of medical assistance to treat the injuries that they sustain and minimise their adverse consequences. 119. These cases turned upon the assumption of responsibility to an individual. 75. Next Mr. Walker argued that the duty of care alleged was one owed for an indeterminate time to an indeterminate number of persons. "Proximity" is, no doubt, a convenient expression as long as it is realised that it is no more than a label which embraces not a definable concept but merely a description of circumstances from which pragmatically, the courts conclude that a duty of care exists.". He inferred that professional boxers would be unlikely to have an innate or well informed concern about safety. 55. PDF An adjacent duty of care? There was a contrast with a fire or a crime, where an unlimited number of members of the public could be affected and the damage could be to property or only economic. This can lead to an accumulation of carbon dioxide in the blood, which in its turn can cause swelling of the brain and a rise in intra-cranial pressure. He would thus have developed the subdural haemorrhage in the most favourable circumstances possible, short of doing so in hospital with staff around him. These facts produced a relationship of close proximity between the Board and those of its members who were professional boxers. Each emphatically concluded that it was. A book of rules and regulations 58 pages in length provides, in detail, for the manner in which professional boxing is to be carried on. Watson v British Boxing Board of Control: Negligent Rule-Making in the Court of Appeal. considered the question of whether it was fair and reasonable to impose a duty of care. The request for an ambulance was accepted. The Articles of Association of the Board provide that its objects include: "To promote and safeguard the interests of members of the company in the United Kingdom and throughout the world including members' (being boxers) interests in boxing contests and tournaments.including..the encouragement. The Board's Medical Committee had issued detailed advice to Medical Officers in relation to their duty at the ringside which was in force at the time of the Watson/Eubank fight. watson v british boxing board of control 2001 case His evidence was that it was his practice to use it where a patient was experiencing breathing difficulties. The evidence of the expert witnesses called on behalf of Mr Watson was that the first ten minutes after loss of consciousness were critical. Interact directly with CaseMine users looking for advocates in your area of specialization. 128. Clearly, they look to the Board's stipulations as providing the appropriate standard. Creating your profile on CaseMine allows you to build your network with fellow lawyers and prospective clients. Similarly, in the case of the advisory teacher brought in to advise on the educational needs of a specific pupil, if he knows that his advice will be communicated to the pupil's parents he must foresee that they will rely on such advice. Questioned further by the Judge, he agreed that to the best of his recollection, there was no discussion during the 1980's about whether the practice of stabilising victims of head injuries at the scene of the event, should be applied to the sport of Boxing. 91. Thus a person may be liable for directing someone into a dangerous location (e.g. Held: There is a close link between the tests in law for proximity . 25Watson v British Board of Boxing Control Ltd [2001] QB 113419, 20 it was claimed that had Watson received immediate resuscitation he would not have been as badly brain damaged, the Court agreed saying that because the Board were in sole charge of safety arrangements there was sufficient proximity for the board of control to owe a duty of care Watson v British Boxing Board of Control [2001] QB 1734 - Law Journals Case: Watson v British Boxing Board of Control [2001] QB 1734 Case Report: Andrew Risk v Rose Bruford College [2013] EWHC 3869 (QB) 12 King's Bench Walk (Chambers of Paul Russell QC) | Personal Injury Law Journal | March 2014 #123 Ringside medical facilities were available, but did not provide immediate resuscitation. They support the proposition that the act of undertaking to cater for the medical needs of a victim of illness or injury will generally carry with it the duty to exercise reasonable care in addressing those needs. He did not, however, identify any obvious stepping stones to his decision. By opening its doors to others to take advantage of the service offered, it comes under a duty of care to those using the service to exercise care in its conduct. Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link. It was a matter for Mr Watson to choose whether or not to compete subject to the Board's rules. Next the Board argued that the presence of an ambulance, with resuscitation equipment, should have satisfied the Judge that this aspect of medical care was adequately provided. If it was held liable it might withdraw from its work, or have to pass on the cost of increased insurance to the detriment of small aircraft operators. It was the evidence of Mr Watson's experts that, while brain damage of the type I have described is cumulative, what happens in the first ten minutes is particularly critical. In these circumstances the Board should owe no greater duty of care than that imposed on a rescuer, that is a duty to exercise reasonable care not to make the situation worse, but no duty to reduce the damage that would have occurred in any event had the rescuer not intervened - see Capital and Counties plc v. Hampshire County Council. The evidence certainly supports the proposition that it was Mr Watson's injuries, and the subsequent advice given by Mr Hamlyn, that caused the Board to change its practice. 71. This contention had some similarities to submissions made in relation to the Popular Flying Association in. Where a patient is brought unconscious to hospital as a result of intra-cranial bleeding, the practice is first to apply a process described as resuscitation or stabilisation. I think that the Judge was right. At p.1172 he summarised his conclusion as follows:-. One issue in each case was whether, on these facts, it could be argued that the local authority had been either directly or vicariously, in breach of a duty of care owed to the child under common law. The Board controlled every aspect of that activity. 29. 44. Indirect Influence on the Occurrence of Injury. The ambulance took him to North Middlesex Hospital, which was less than a mile away. Obviously a full report should then be sent to the relevant Area Council or Board and the sooner this is done, from a medical view point, the better.". Once resuscitation, or stabilisation has taken place, the next stage is neuro-surgery to remove the haematoma and seal any ruptured veins or arteries. "The role of Medical Officer at a Professional Boxing Tournament is a very important one and requires an adequate working knowledge of sports medicine, the diagnosis and treatment of acute medical conditions and a working knowledge of the training and dietary requirements of a Professional Boxer and Athlete. Next Mr Walker argued that the Board did not create the danger of injury or the need for medical assistance. If, which I doubt, this conclusion represents any step beyond what is already settled law, I am fully persuaded it is a proper one to take.". However, despite an English doctor's professional duty to offer their assistance, thi. Because the facts of this case are so unusual, there is no category in which a duty of care has been established from which one can advance to this case by a small incremental step. He went on to hold that, in relation to the child abuse cases, the statutory scheme was incompatible with the existence of a direct common law duty of care owed by the local authorities. Michael Watson stands to receive no more than 400,000 compensation The settlement of Watson's case against the British Boxing Board of Control, approved by the High Court in London. The facilities include a scheme which enables members to construct and fly their own light aircraft. 3.9 each boxer must be examined after every contest and a report sent to the Board or Area Council concerned if necessary. The subject matter of the advice and activities of the professionals is the child. Tutorial 3 ( Sport Law) - LIA3030 SPORTS LAW TUTORIAL 3 1. Explain v Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Watson v British Board of Boxing Control: QBD 12 Oct 1999 A governing body of a sport, had a duty to insist on arrangements for sporting events, held under its aegis, to ensure proper access to medical aid. 25. This contention had some similarities to submissions made in relation to the Popular Flying Association in Perrett v Collins. He sued the Board because they were in charge of safety arrangements at professional boxing matches, and evidence showed that if they had made immediate medical . 78. He suffered severe brain damage after being injuredduring a match. If the boxer remains unconscious, then full emergency procedures should be undertaken, the stretcher placed in the ring, the boxer very carefully transferred to it, preferably by skilled handlers and, if needs be, the other doctor should by then have rung ambulance control and have contacted the local hospital to inform them of the problem. the British Boxing Board of Control was found to . The Claimant would have been resuscitated within a few minutes of 23.00 and in St. Bartholomews by 23.45 at the latest. The statutory obligations in relation to certifying airworthiness was designed, at least in substantial part, for the protection of those who might be injured if an aircraft was certified as being fit to fly when it was not. 61. Watson v British Boxing Board, above Michael v South Wales Police, above ABC v St George's Healthcare NHS Trust . 68. They did not have the expertise in providing such resuscitation; nor did they have the necessary equipment. Order: Appal dismissed with costs on the issues of liability and causation here and below, those costs to be assessed forthwith on to Legal Services Assessment; 18,000 in Court to be paid out in part satisfaction of those costs forthwith; detailed assessment on standard basis; Legal Services Commission taxation; application for permission to appeal to House of Lords refused. The Board set out by its rules, directions and guidance, to make comprehensive provision for the services to be provided to safeguard the health of the boxer. This has relevance to a number of the points discussed above. In my judgment the Judge was entitled to conclude that the standard of reasonable care required that there should be a resuscitation facility at the ringside. Asser International Sports Law Blog | Guest Blog - Mixed Martial Arts I would echo the comment of Lord Steyn in Marc Rich & Co. v Bishop Rock Ltd [1996] AC 211 at p.236: "None of the cases cited provided any realistic analogy to be used as a springboard for a decision one way or the other in this case. Mon 8 Oct 2001 12.23 EDT Michael Watson will receive no more than 400,000 compensation in settlement of a damages claim worth up to 2.5m. * The Board failed to require a medical examination of Mr Watson immediately following the conclusion of the contest. 4. By then, so he submitted, the evidence established that the damage would have been done. . Boxing members of the Board, including Mr Watson, could reasonably rely upon the Board to look after their safety. 's examination of the ship, and that the cargo owners simply relied on the undertakings of the shipowners, it is in my view impossible to force the present set of facts into even the most expansive view of the doctrine of voluntary assumption of responsibility.". I consider that these were proper findings on the evidence and that Mr Watson's case on breach of duty was made out. 97. Mr Usherwood had authority, under an Order made pursuant to the Civil Aviation Act 1982 to certify that the aircraft was fit to fly. He gave evidence that the WBO imposed no medical requirements in respect of the fight and that in these circumstances, the ordinary Board rules and policy would and did apply. Watson v British Board of Boxing Control: QBD 12 Oct 1999 It examines the ability of insurers to influence legislation relevant to the tort system. 109. The facts of this case are not common to other sports. 99. The decision is of interest for several reasons. 57. 112. 86. Serious brain damage such as that suffered by Mr Watson, though happily an uncommon consequence of a boxing injury, represented the most serious risk posed by the sport and one that required to be addressed. The association exists to facilitate amateurs to enjoy facilities for flying light aircraft. The claim was based upon the alleged negligent failure of the defendant to enforce disciplinary regulations against drunkenness so as to protect the deceased against his own known proclivity for alcohol . 35. His conclusions as to duty are to be found in the following passages from his judgment. The doctor does not, by examining the applicant, come under any general duty of medical care to the applicant. It concludes that, if account is taken of all these areas, insurance has been of vital importance to the law of tort. The General Medical Council clearly states that a doctor must offer help when off-duty, if an emergency arises. Mr Watson's case, in essence, was that there should have been a different regime in place - Mr Walker described it as an intensive care unit at the ringside. Watson v British Boxing Board of Control - Wikipedia Republished // WIKI 2 An analogy can be drawn with the duty of an employer, whose activities involve a particular health risk, to make provision for its employees to receive appropriate medical attention - see Stokes v. Guest Keen & Nettlefold (Bolts & Nuts) [1968] 1 WLR 1776.