2022.08.24 WednesdayThis ground of appeal would have been unsustainable. He held the Commonwealth middleweight title from 1989-1991. . Once you create your profile, you will be able to: Claim the judgments where you have appeared by linking them directly to your profile and maintain a record of your body of work. 33. In this way the Board reduces this aspect of the promoter's responsibility to the boxer to the contractual obligation to comply with the requirements of the Board's Rules in relation to the provision of medical facilities and assistance. Lord Bridge went on to state that these ingredients were insufficiently precise to be used as practical tests and to commend the desirability of proceeding by analogy with established categories of negligence. The L.A.S. Ringside medical facilities were available, but did not provide immediate resuscitation. That, however, did not prove to be the position. The Board's Grounds of Appeal argued that in making policy decisions, the Board ought not to be held to be negligent unless such decisions were found to be wholly irrational. In this the Judge was correct. Subsequently they were incorporated in the Rules by an addition to Regulation 8. I find this distinction between instructions as to duties and instructions as to how to perform duties elusive and over subtle. A boxer member of the Board would not be aware of the details of all these matters. On a preliminary issue the House of Lords held that the classification society had no duty of care to the cargo owners. considered the question of whether it was fair and reasonable to impose a duty of care. The defendant appealed against a finding of 25% responsibility in having failed to warn climbers that the existence of thick foam would not remove all . Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. There was evidence that the Board's Medical Committee met regularly to consider medical precautions. It is not sufficient for the doctor to be in the vicinity of the ring as in the case of an emergency the speed of the doctor's reactions in treating this are all important. By the time he received resuscitation in hospital he had sustained permanent brain damage which such treatment would have prevented. It is on this basis that it is possible to draw a distinction between the doctor who goes to the assistance of the victim of a road accident and the hospital that receives that victim into its casualty department. The medical room should be situated in close proximity to the boxer's dressing rooms and be reasonable accessible to and from the ring. Lord Phillips in the Court of Appeal described the case as a unique one because here, rather than . Michael Watson was injured in a boxing match supervised by the British Boxing Board of Control (BBBofC or BBBC), which was expected . 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. Any loss of consciousness was short lived - he regained his feet and walked to his corner. 120. 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.". I consider that the Judge could properly have done so. The board lost its. The decision is of interest for several reasons. The final question is, to what extent? Once proximity is established by reference to the test which I have identified, none of the more sophisticated criteria which have to be used in relation to allegations of liability for mere economic loss need to be applied in relation to personal injury, nor have they been in the decided cases.". The occurrence of a haematoma could not have been prevented but its effects could have been mitigated. 17. Watson & British Boxing Board Of Control Ltd & Anor IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE Case No: QBENF1999/1137/A2 COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION (THE HON MR JUSTICE IAN KENNEDY) Tuesday 19th December 2000 THE MASTER OF THE ROLLS LORD JUSTICE MAY LORD JUSTICE LAWS Respondent/Claimant 61. 25. 3.5.2 For British and Commonwealth Championship contests only, or The defendant company had a policy for achieving responsible gambling, . That is true as a fact. The Board held itself out as treating the safety of boxers as of paramount importance. We do not provide advice. An ambulance should be on site from the start of the tournament, possibly with a crew of trained para-medics. 78. The physical safety of boxers has always been a prime concern of the Board. 3.10 The promoter shall procure that at all promotions a stretcher is available for use near the ring. In the second place it was not practical to use this equipment while the ambulance was on the move. Had the Board simply given advice to all involved in professional boxing as to appropriate medical precautions, it would be strongly arguable that there was insufficient proximity between the Board and individual boxers to give rise to a duty of care. True it is that, in the absence of a statutory power or duty, the authority could not offer such a service. 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. iii) that the breach of duty alleged did not cause Mr Watson's injuries. The provision made by those rules in relation to medical assistance was plain. for the existence of a duty of care were present. In support of that proposition Mr. Walker relied upon, 79. It did not summon medical assistance and its supervision of him was inadequate". Any such inspector has to be approved by the association". The ordinary test of reasonable skill and care is the correct one to apply. [2], The case first went to the High Court of Justice, where Kennedy, J, gave his judgment on 24 September 1999, awarding Watson around 1 million in damages. The normal duty of a doctor to exercise reasonable skill and care is well established as a common law duty of care. No contest shall take place unless fully trained personnel are able to operate such resuscitation equipment are present throughout the promotion.". The time was now 23.08. rejected the submission that any negligence on the part of Mr Usherwood was only an indirect cause of the crash. This is an argument which might appeal to boxing enthusiasts, but would not be accepted by the British Medical Association. [3] Kennedy held that there was a "sufficient nexus" between Watson and the BBBC to create a duty of care, and that Watson's consent to the fight (which would normally be considered a defence of volenti non fit injuria) was not a consent to the inadequate safety measures. In X (Minors) v Bedfordshire County Council [1995] 2 AC 633 five appeals were heard together by the House of Lords because they raised, by way of preliminary issues, similar questions about the duty of care. 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. .if(typeof ez_ad_units != 'undefined'){ez_ad_units.push([[250,250],'swarb_co_uk-medrectangle-4','ezslot_4',113,'0','0'])};__ez_fad_position('div-gpt-ad-swarb_co_uk-medrectangle-4-0'); Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete. 71. The defendant said that the report was preliminary only and could not found a . Flashcards. I now come to the second special feature of this case - the fact that the Board is not charged with having failed itself to provide appropriate medical treatment, but with having failed to impose rules and regulations which would have ensured that others did so. The background to this case was described by Hobhouse L.J. The movement of the brain within the skull may rupture veins, or more rarely an artery, inside the head leading to bleeding which builds up into a blood clot or haematoma. 35. The Board, however, arrogates to itself the task of determining what medical facilities will be provided at a contest by (i) requiring the boxer and the promoter to contract on terms under which the Board's Rules will apply and (ii) making provision in those Rules for the medical facilities and assistance to be provided to care for the boxer in the event of injury. I consider that these were proper findings on the evidence and that Mr Watson's case on breach of duty was made out. The Board contended that this was unjustifiable, since it would require Rules which in effect instructed doctors as to how to perform their duties. 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. 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. As already stated, no tournament is allowed to commence or continue without one doctor sitting ringside. 117. He emphasised that the Board does not provide medical treatment or employ doctors. 65. Mr Watson was one of a defined number of boxing members of the Board. This contention had some similarities to submissions made in relation to the Popular Flying Association in Perrett v Collins. A primary injury such as that described can have secondary consequences which are much more serious. Whilst unattended he vomited and died as a result of inhaling his own vomit. b) A limit on the number of rounds to twelve (Rule 3.7). I propose to develop the relevant facts more fully in the context of each of these issues. 130. Had the ambulance been, in fact, just as satisfactory, this would have meant that the absence of a Rule requiring such a facility would have had no causative effect. He sued the owner, Mr Usherwood and the Popular Flying Association ("the PFA"). "One can summarise the aims of treatment of a patient who has been rendered unconscious as the result of a head injury as follows: 1. In that case a doctor phoned for an ambulance to take to hospital urgently a patient who had suffered an asthma attack. 12. Attempts have been made, within Parliament and outside, to bring about the banning of the sport of boxing. This has relevance to a number of the points discussed above. The professionals were employed or retained to advise the local authority in relation to the well being of the plaintiffs but not to advise or treat the plaintiffs". that the negligence alleged fell into the category of directly causing foreseeable personal injury, both he and Swinton Thomas L.J. Considerations of insurance are not relevant. These considerations lead to the final point made by Mr Walker in the context of proximity. This can, of itself, result in the restriction of the supply of oxygen to the brain. Mr Watson was put on a stretcher, which was placed on a trolley and wheeled towards the ambulance. I shall revert to the details of this when I come to consider the question of breach. He further alleged that had he received that treatment, he would not have sustained permanent brain damage. 107. Such duty does not depend on the existence of any contractual relationship between the person causing and the person suffering the damage. 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. I would simply comment that if the Board were given the statutory function of directing what medical assistance should be provided to boxers at the stadium, I consider that it would be at least arguable that they owed boxers a duty of care in exercising that function. 3. The Board assumes the responsibility of determining the nature of the medical facilities and assistance to be provided. Mr Walker also suggested that a finding in favour of Mr Watson in this case would involve postulating that other sporting regulatory bodies, such as the Rugby Football Union, owed duties of care to the participants in their sports in relation to their rules and regulations. 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. Ormrod L.J. The contest was sponsored not by the Board, but by the World Boxing Organisation (WBO). "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". The peculiar features of the duty of care alleged are as follows: i) the duty alleged is not to take reasonable care to avoid causing personal injury. Moreover, the tendering of any advice will in many cases involve interviewing and, in the case of doctors, examining the child. 72. Dr Ross, the Board's Chief Medical Officer for the Southern Area, was asked why the Medical Committee did not make the recommendations made after Mr Watson's injuries at an earlier stage. 293.". This involves intubation, or the insertion of an endotracheal tube. 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. The most obvious category of case of a duty of care to administer medical treatment to restrict the consequences of injury or illness, or to effect a cure, is that of the duty owed by a doctor or a hospital authority to a patient. It was also important to have a prior arrangement with the hospital with a neurological unit, and with that unit placed on standby. She claimed the respondent was liable under the Act and at common law for failing to keep it safe. The duty will be owed to the victim of a road accident who is received by the hospital unconscious. 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:-. Before confirming, please ensure that you have thoroughly read and verified the judgment. 113. 54. As a result of the delay the patient sustained brain damage. The doctors should decide between them who will remain ringside and who will undertake the emergency treatment should the need arise. Mr Watson's injuries were not, however, without precedent. It seems to me that this is almost implicit in Mr Walker's argument that to issue such a requirement expressly, was to instruct a doctor as to how to perform his duty. [6] This was an extension to the previous duty of care under negligence, and also serves as an exception to the rule under trespass to the person that a defendant will not be liable for personal harm caused in sporting matches which the claimant consents to. Mr Watson belonged to a class which was within the contemplation of the Board. Since the seminal case of Condon v Basi [1985] . The leading case in terms of the duty of care owed by governing bodies in UK law is Watson v British Boxing Board of Control [2001] QB 1134, where the governing body was held to be liable for the horrific injuries suffered by Michael Watson in his boxing bout with Chris Eubank. 88. 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. Saville L.J. Mr Walker urged that a duty of care should not be imposed upon the Board because it was a non profit-making organisation and did not carry insurance. Mr Watson received resuscitation and neuro-surgery in hospital in circumstances that I shall describe when I come to deal with causation. There was no contract between the parties, but boxers had to fight under the Board's rules. Nearly half an hour elapsed between the end of the fight and the time that he got there. The issue in this action is not whether the right policy was adopted but simply whether proper care was used in making provision for medical treatment of Mr Watson. 41. In this way the Board reduces this aspect of the promoter's responsibility to the boxer to the contractual obligation to comply with the requirements of the Board's Rules in relation to the provision of medical facilities and assistance. James George, James George. Therefore, it is likely that injuries arising from such play occur frequently but when do they occur as an act of negligence? This did not, however, affect the position so far as responsibility for the safety of the boxers was concerned. There had been a number of similar cases in the 1980's. There are a number of problems with this submission. Michael Watson was injured in a boxing match supervised by the British Boxing Board of Control (BBBofC or BBBC), which was expected to provide medical care. 67. * The Board failed to require a medical examination of Mr Watson immediately following the conclusion of the contest. 77. I conclude that the Judge correctly found that the Board owed Mr Watson a duty of care. In these circumstances the claim against Mr Usherwood was a conventional claim for carelessness causing direct and foreseeable personal injury. Appeal from 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. I have not heard evidence to the effect that the Board or its medical advisers had before this incident considered, and for some reason decided not to follow, what may not unfairly be called this protocol. In 1991 there were only about 550 active boxers, of which almost all were semi-professional. Rule 23 of the Board's rules and regulations provided: "23.1 Commonwealth, European and World Championships when promoted in Great Britain and Northern Ireland must be organised and controlled in accordance with the Regulations of the BBB of C except where such Regulations may be at variance with those of any Commonwealth, European or World Boxing Authorities with whom the BBC of C may for the time being be affiliated, when the Regulations of such Authorities shall apply. The vessel sailed and sank a few days later with the loss of the cargo. In consequence this special need was not addressed, to the detriment of the child. These facts bring the Board into close proximity with each individual boxer who contracts with a promoter to fight under the Board's rules. The North Middlesex Hospital had no neurosurgical department, so Mr Watson was transferred by ambulance, still unconscious, to St. Bartholomew's Hospital. Michael Watson was injured in a boxing match supervised by the British Boxing Board of Control (BBBofC or BBBC), which was expected to . 91. These recommendations Mr Hamlyn set out in a detailed paper for the Board two days later. In the final round, Watson lost consciousness and was taken to the hospital, arriving there nearly half an hour after the end of the fight and received resuscitation treatment. Thus Mr Watson voluntarily submitted to any risk associated with inadequacy of medical safeguards. 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. "The postulate of a simple duty to avoid any harm that is, with hindsight, reasonably capable of being foreseen becomes untenable without the imposition of some intelligible limits to keep the law of negligence within the bounds of common sense and practicality. Held: A body which had responsibility for licensing and setting conditions for the boxing matches was liable in negligence when, having assumed responsibility for the boxers medical care, the standards it set were inadequate. 62. The onlookers derive entertainment, but none of the physical and moral benefits which have been seen as the fruits of engagement in many sports.". 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. This has left him paralysed down the left side and with other physical and mental disability. 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 . Each doctor is expected to attend a tournament fully equipped to cover all emergencies. Mr Watson suffered some, at least, of these secondary effects, which were the cause of his permanent brain damage. 110. The doctors required by the rules to be present at a contest had to be doctors who had been approved by the Board. Thereafter, when the defendant assumed responsibility for him, it accepts that the measures taken fell short of the standard reasonably to be expected. The nature of the damage was important. Test. He won a historic High Court case in Sept 1999, raising questions about the future of the professional sport in the UK. Search for more papers by this author. Had he been asked in the period before the Eubank/Watson fight to advise on precautions in relation to the risk of serious head injury, he said that he would have given the same advice as Mr Hamlyn. The issue is whether the standard of reasonable care required the Board to change their practice in order to address the risks of such injuries before the Watson/Eubank fight. "As a general rule a sufficient relationship will exist when someone possessed of a special skill undertakes to apply that skill for the assistance of another person who relies upon such skill and there is direct and substantial reliance by the plaintiff on the defendant's skill. .Cited Portsmouth Youth Activities Committee (A Charity) v Poppleton CA 12-Jun-2008 The claimant was injured climbing without ropes (bouldering) at defendants activity centre. 56. Test. The Board called to give evidence Mr Peter Richards, a Consultant Neuro-Surgeon with Charing Cross Hospital between 1987 and 1995. The undertaking is to use the special skills which the doctor and hospital authorities have to treat the patient. If Mr Watson has no remedy against the Board, he has no remedy at all. The article examines this regulatory framework; where traditional attitudes about the social desirability of sport and acceptance of harm support an autonomous self-regulatory approach, often insulated from the full application of the criminal law. Mr Morris told the court that he would expect the Medical Committee, and its Chief Medical Officer, to keep abreast of developments in sports medicine that impacted on the safety of boxers in the ring. The association exists to facilitate amateurs to enjoy facilities for flying light aircraft. In theory the medical officers at a contest would be appointed and paid by the Promoter from the body of approved doctors. All these matters lead me to conclude that the Judge was right to find that the Board was under a duty of care to Mr Watson. [3] Watson spent 40 days in a coma and 6 years in a wheelchair, with doctors initially predicting that he would never walk again. Dr Whiteson did not give evidence. If it had in place the appropriate protocols for provision of medical care, the claimants injuries would not have been so severe. 123. Caring for the needs of boxers, and in particular the physical safety of boxers, is the primary object of the Board. The Board, however, went far beyond this. Most boxers recover very quickly having been knocked down and counted out and most, in fact, are fully conscious, if somewhat dazed, by the time the count reaches ten. If any doubt arises concerning a boxer's condition then referral to a local hospital for emergency treatment or advice should be undertaken and a report sent to the Board. Such treatment had been standard form in hospitals for many years prior to 1991. 124. about 23.01. There are also reasons of public policy for not imposing a duty of care to individuals in relation to the performance of their functions. Mr Watson's case can be summarised as follows: i) The Board assumed responsibility for the control of an activity the essence of which was that personal injuries should be sustained by those participating. He held that he was left in no doubt that the Board was in breach of its duty in that it did not institute some such system or protocol as that which Mr Hamlyn was later to propose. At p.1172 he summarised his conclusion as follows:-. It is not necessary for a supposed tortfeasor to have created the danger himself. More significantly, he would not be in a position to know whether the provisions that the Board required to be put in place represented all that it was reasonable to provide for his safety. Without so doing, however, the Judge concluded that for some reason no thought was given to the practicality of introducing at the ringside what he found had been a standard response, where the presence of sub-dural bleeding was known or suspected, since at least 1980. Before making any decision, you must read the full case report and take professional advice as appropriate. The probability must therefore have been that he could have been among those patients who would have had a favourable outcome, or no circumstance peculiar to his physical make-up has been identified to suggest why that should not be so". In an open letter to BMA delegates, written some time in the 1980's, Dr Whiteson, the Chief Medical Officer to the Board, wrote "The British Boxing Board of Control is justifiably proud of its reputation of being in the vanguard of the protection of professional boxers." [2] He was given no oxygen, and first sent to a hospital which lacked a neurosurgery unit. While Buxton L.J. Therefore in giving that advice he owes a duty to the child to exercise the skill and care of a reasonable advisory teacher.".
Is Wes Still On Crikey It's The Irwins,
Articles W
