Dr Ross, who was a member of the Medical Committee for a number of years before the Watson fight, was asked whether he remembered discussions about treatment in the ring of head injuries before that fight. I think that the Judge was right. In Smoldon v Whitworth [1997] PIQR P133 the duty of care had been conceded in the context of a school colts game and similarly, boxing came under scrutiny in Watson v British Boxing. It seems to me that, but for the intervention of the Board, the promoter would probably owe a common law duty to the boxer to make reasonable provision for the immediate treatment of his injuries. During the match Watson was knocked out by Eubank, and it was 7 minutes before doctors attended him; eventually 3 doctors and an ambulance were needed. can also be found in Watson v British Boxing Board of Control [2001] QB 1134 in which Lord Phillips MR's advice on dealing with analogous cases was to first identify the principles relied upon as giving rise to a duty of care in the present case. 26. On the law relied upon by the Judge, this was all that Mr Watson needed to succeed. All involved in a boxing contest were obliged to accept and comply with the Board's requirements. To my mind it is difficult in such a situation to profess a concern for safety and to deny a duty such as I have described. Each doctor is expected to attend a tournament fully equipped to cover all emergencies. It is, however, clear that the test is an objective one: Henderson v Merrett Syndicates Ltd., [1995] 2 AC 145, 181. The Board had, or had available, medical expertise. 129. However, should this not be so, then the boxer's gumshield should be removed, an adequate airway established and the boxer put on his left side so that should he fit or vomit he will not obstruct his airway. These cases establish that where A advises B as to action to be taken which will directly and foreseeably affect the safety or well-being of C, a situation of sufficient proximity exists to found a duty of care on the part of A towards C. Whether in fact such a duty arises will depend upon the facts of the individual case and, in particular, upon whether such a duty of care would cut across any statutory scheme pursuant to which the advice was given. 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. While this may not be true of the volunteer who offers assistance at the scene of an accident, it will be true of a body whose purpose is or includes the provision of such assistance. He sued the owner, Mr Usherwood and the Popular Flying Association ("the PFA"). Hearn refuses to give up fight after Benn v Eubank thrown into chaos by Watson v British Boxing Board of Control The Importance of Evidence in Proving a Breach of Duty Rugby Rugby is a dangerous sport with heavy body collisions between players and regularly, multiple players at any given time. The arrival of the ambulance was greatly delayed without any reasonable explanation. 32. 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. 45. He did not, however, identify any obvious stepping stones to his decision. At least 20 minutes, and probably nearer 30 minutes, could have been saved. This argument was allied to Mr Walker's submission that the Judge should not have found that the rules should have required immediate medical attention to be given to a boxer where his physical condition led to the contest being stopped. Michael Watson was a boxer who, on 21 September 1991, fought Chris Eubank under the supervision of the British Boxing Board of Control (BBBC), the British professional boxing governing body. Another example was a general direction given, at about the same time, that an ambulance and crew should be in attendance at a boxing contest. Subsequently they were incorporated in the Rules by an addition to Regulation 8. held that. They did not have the expertise in providing such resuscitation; nor did they have the necessary equipment. It made provision in its rules for the medical precautions to be employed and made compliance with these rules mandatory.. These rules included provisions for medical inspection of boxers and for the attendance of two doctors at a fight. In these circumstances there is no close proximity between the services and the general public. The patient can then be taken straight to the nearest neurosurgical unit. .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. ii) to identify any categories of cases in which these principles have given rise to a duty of care, or conversely where they have not done so. 105. 3.5.2 For British and Commonwealth Championship contests only, or 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. 52. 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. In particular, the Board controlled the medical assistance that would be provided. 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. Professor Teasdale had some reservations about the effectiveness of some of this, but he accepted that this was standard practice. By then, so he submitted, the evidence established that the damage would have been done. This did not, however, affect the position so far as responsibility for the safety of the boxers was concerned. Insurance and the tort system | Legal Studies | Cambridge Core 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. [1988] 1 AC 1074 at 1090; and Hotson v East Berkshire Area Health Authority [1987] 1 AC 750 at 783. Get 1 point on providing a valid sentiment to this Afternoon in a Yellow Room, by Charles Edwar, CHRONICLES - The Unz In delivering the leading speech Lord Browne-Wilkinson observed at p.739: "The question whether there is such a common law duty and if so its ambit, must be profoundly influenced by the statutory framework within which the acts complained of were done.". 50. 57. 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. 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. 95. at p.258 as follows: "The third defendants are a trading company incorporated under the companies Acts. By the time he received resuscitation in hospital he had sustained permanent brain damage which such treatment would have prevented. considered the question of whether it was fair and reasonable to impose a duty of care. A boxer member of the Board would not be aware of the details of all these matters. Mr Walker accepted that if Mr Watson had specifically asked the Board for advice as to the precautions that he ought to have in place for his fight, and the Board had given advice, the Board would have been under a duty to exercise care in giving that advice. 69. In 1990 Mr Watson had been involved in litigation with his manager, in which the Board had filed an Affidavit. Also by Rupert Sheldrake A New Science of Life (1981; new edition 2009) The Presence of the Past (1988; new edition 2011) The Rebirth of Nature (1990) Seven Experiments That Could Change the World (1994; new edition 2002) Dogs That Know When Their Owners Are Coming Home (1999; new edition 2011) The Sense of Being Stared At (2003) with Ralph Abraham and Terence McKenna Chaos Creativity and . Outside circles: Next, divide the goal into the major categories of tasks you'll need to accomplish to achieve the greater goalin this case, Title, Studio, Topics, Audience, and so on. These make it necessary: i) to identify the principles which are relied upon as giving rise to a duty of care in this case. Get 1 point on adding a valid citation to this judgment. The Judge accepted that this was the case but ruled that in the final analysis that it was for the Court to determine whether even the most widely followed practice was acceptable. Nearly half an hour elapsed between the end of the fight and the time that he got there. Likewise, a doctor who happened to witness a road accident will very likely go to the assistance of anyone injured, but he is not under any legal obligation to do so, save in certain limited circumstances which are not relevant, and the relationship of doctor and patient does not arise. The doctors who were actually present were not aware of the desirability of immediate resuscitation of a victim with a brain haemorrhage. He submitted that the Board would presumably owe the same duty to boxers who came from abroad to box and persons who were not yet boxers, and perhaps not even born, when the rules were made. Similarly none of the particular difficulties which arise in relation to economic loss arise in relation to the causing of personal injury. 3. If it had in place the appropriate protocols for provision of medical care, the claimants injuries would not have been so severe. 3. 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. The Board encouraged and supported its boxing members in the pursuit of an activity which involved inevitable physical injury and the need for medical precautions against the consequences of such injury. 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. 100. The Board has argued that until this accident no-one had suggested that they should institute this protocol. An overview of key case law relating to negligent - LawInSport I do not find this surprising. His answer was that he was sure that these things were discussed but he could not remember. Contracts between boxer and manager and boxer and promoter have to be in standard form, providing expressly that the parties will observe the Board's rules. * Enter a valid Journal (must 87. He said that a report had identified the risks. watson v british boxing board of control 2001 case Search for more papers by this author. These can be divided into three categories: i) rules designed to ensure that a boxer is not permitted to fight unless he is fit. . There was no contract between the parties, but boxers had to fight under the Board's rules. 58. 117. (Rule 8.1). Watson successfully sued the BBBC for 400,000 after being left with brain injuries following his 1991 fight with Chris Eubank. It is said, rightly, that in general such professional duty of care is owed irrespective of contract and can arise even where the professional assumes to act for the plaintiff pursuant to a contract with a third party: Henderson v Merrett Syndicates Ltd [1995] 2 AC 145; White v Jones [1995] 2 AC 207. In the leading speech Lord Slynn advanced the following statement of principle at pp.790-1: "As to the first question, it is long and well-established, now elementary, that persons exercising a particular skill or profession may owe a duty of care in the performance to people who it can be foreseen will be injured if due skill and care are not exercised, and if injury or damage can be shown to have been caused by the lack of care. 3. (Rule 5.9(c)). The police have been held to owe no duty to respond to a 999 call or, having done so, to exercise reasonable care to prevent a burglary Alexandrou v. Oxford [1993] 4 All ER 328 [1994] 4 All ER 328. It is worth setting out the passage of the report of the Board's expert, Dr Cartlidge, which dealt with this aspect of the case. Held: There is a close link between the tests in law for proximity . In an opinion read by Phillips MR, the court upheld Kennedy's decision, noting that it "broke new ground". 55. On 21st September 1991 Michael Watson fought Chris Eubank for the World Boxing Organisation Super-Middleweight title at Tottenham Hotspur Football Club in London. He held the Commonwealth middleweight title from 1989-1991. . In this case the following matters are particularly material: 1. It is not necessary for a supposed tortfeasor to have created the danger himself. In Cassidy v Ministry of Health [1951] 2 K.B. 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. [3] Watson spent 40 days in a coma and 6 years in a wheelchair, with doctors initially predicting that he would never walk again. It is clear on the authorities that the duty to take reasonable care to prevent further harm and to effect a cure is founded on the acceptance of the patient as a patient, which carries with it an implicit undertaking to care for the patient's needs. The Board had given notice that he would be called as a witness and submitted the witness statement from him. Lord Phillips in the Court of Appeal described the case as a unique one because here, rather than . Watson v British Boxing Board of Control - Alchetron, the free social There was chaos in and outside the ring and seven minutes elapsed before he was examined by one of the doctors who were in attendance. After the operation Mr Watson was taken to the intensive care unit where he arrived at 04.45. The duty of the Board and of those advising it on medical matters, was to be prospective in their thinking and seek competent advice as to how a recognised danger could be combated. 29. This may entail suturing of a wound, the assessment of the seriousness of any injury or maybe just simple advice concerning future training or contests. 104. No contest shall take place unless fully trained personnel are able to operate such resuscitation equipment are present throughout the promotion.". 91. [2] He was given no oxygen, and first sent to a hospital which lacked a neurosurgery unit. 115. Each case involved the performance by the local authority of duties imposed under statute for the benefit of children. At the end of the contest one doctor remains ringside, the other should follow both contestants back to the dressing room and should at least check that both boxers are in a satisfactory condition and if not instigate any treatment that is required, preferably in the treatment room provided. 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. The request for an ambulance was accepted. in that case. In any event I believe that this point vanishes when causation is considered. Sports injuries - Edge Hill University The evidence of the expert witnesses called on behalf of Mr Watson was that the first ten minutes after loss of consciousness were critical. "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. The Politics of traditional-federal state formationand land In my judgement in the present cases, the social workers and the psychiatrist did not, by accepting the instructions of the local authority, assume any general professional duty of care to the plaintiff children. Mr Watson brought an action against the Board. Citation. at p.262 which I have set out above. So far I have not dealt with the question of reliance by Mr Watson on the exercise of care by the Board. The essence of Mr Watson's case is that there should have been a system under which such equipment would not merely be available, but used immediately in the event of a brain injury. The final point taken by the Board was that they did not receive advice in relation to the desirability of ringside resuscitation until after Mr Watson's injuries. Thus the Board was a body with special knowledge giving advice to a defined class of persons in the knowledge that it would rely upon that advice in the defined situation of boxing contests. James George, James George. 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 Judge summarised his findings on the facts as follows:-. 60. This point was put to the Judge. None of the three doctors present went to his assistance until requested to do so. The hospital should be requested to confirm that a Neuro-Surgeon would be on stand-by. Such duty does not depend on the existence of any contractual relationship between the person causing and the person suffering the damage. The following rules fall into this category: 3.8 The promoter shall procure that two doctors, who must be approved by the Area Medical Officer, attend at all promotions, one of whom must be seated at the ringside at all times during the contest. 81. 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. (pp.27-8). c) Rules governing bandaging for the hands and the composition of boxing gloves (Rules 3.22 and 3.23). PDF An adjacent duty of care? held at p.557: "Is this a case in which it can be said that the plaintiff was closely and directly affected by the acts of the architect as to have been reasonably in his contemplation when he was directing his mind to the acts or omissions which are called into question? The next ground advanced by the Board in support of the contention that the Judge applied too high a standard, was that there was no evidence that any other boxing authority in the World imposed more rigorous requirements than those of the Board's rules. Michael Watson was a boxer who, on 21 September 1991, fought Chris Eubank under the supervision of the British Boxing Board of Control (BBBC), the British professional boxing governing body. The relevant findings of the Judge were as follows:-. As I read the judgment the duty of care turned upon the acceptance by the ambulance service of the request to provide an ambulance and thus the acceptance of responsibility for the care of the particular patient. Watson v British Boxing Board of Control - Wikipedia 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. PDF Rules and Regulations 2021 - British Boxing Board of Control 2. Watson v British Boxing Board of Control - Wikipedia Lord Woolf M.R. 120. 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. That argument was rejected. 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. Watson v British Boxing Board of Control explained I personally don't think that the decision to follow option B as opposed to option A had any material affect upon Watson.", The Medical facilities provided to Mr Watson at the ringside, 102. The Judge's findings in relation to breach of duty appear from the following passages in his judgment: "The standard response where the presence of subdural bleeding is known or suspected has been agreed since at least 1980, which is to intubate, ventilate, sedate, paralyse, and in Britain at least, to administer Manitol. Dealing with the arguments of policy advanced on behalf of PFA, Buxton L.J. Mr Usherwood had authority, under an Order made pursuant to the Civil Aviation Act 1982 to certify that the aircraft was fit to fly. 133. The psychologist sees the child and carries out an assessment. At the third stage, questions of `proximity' and of what is `fair, just and reasonable' have to be considered. The Plaintiffs were children with dyslexia. The defendant company had a policy for achieving responsible gambling, . The local council had waived a requirement that the balustrade meet the . They also argued that it was not fair, just and reasonable that the PFA should be liable to negligence. 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 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 board lost its. At the outset, however, I propose to identify some significant features of the present case, which place it outside any established category of duty of care in negligence. See Hedley Byrne & Co. Ltd. v Heller & Partners Ltd [1964] AC 465 and Henderson v Merrett Syndicates Ltd [1995] 2 AC 145. I turn to the distinctive features of this case. Watson v British Boxing Board of Control Ltd and Another Mr Block, the Secretary of the Board's Southern Area Council, reported to the Board that the arrangements in place were satisfactory and that the tournament could receive the Board's approval. In these circumstances, it is no cause for surprise that the equipment was not in fact used. Boxing members of the Board, including Mr Watson, could reasonably rely upon the Board to look after their safety. ii) the duty alleged is not directly, through the servants or agents of the Board to provide proper facilities and administer proper treatment to those injured. Had the Board said nothing, it might not be liable, but once it gave advice by setting rules, it came to be responsible. 121. 108. The fight had taken place in accordance with the rules of the British Boxing Board of Control Ltd., ("the Board"). 54. Watson faces 400,000 compensation limit | Boxing | The Guardian CLUE. Clearly, they look to the Board's stipulations as providing the appropriate standard. We do not provide advice. I turn to consider the extent to which there are categories of cases, in which a duty of care has been held to exist, or alternatively held not to exist involving these features. Has the law encroached too far into the world of sport? - The Telegraph A case that is instructive is the English case of Watson v British Boxing Board of Control ([2001] 2 WLR 1256), the British Boxing Board of Control (BBBC) was held liable for the injuries sustained by Michael Watson. I consider that the Judge was entitled to find on the evidence, that had the Hamlyn protocol been in place, the outcome of Mr Watson's injuries would have been significantly better. At this meeting Mr Hamlyn expressed the view that it was vital that at the ringside there should be the right doctors with the right equipment. Thus the necessary `proximity' was not made out. It is not clear why the ambulance took so long to reach the hospital. Watson v British Boxing Board of Control [2001] QB 1134 was a case of the Court of Appeal of England and Wales that established an exception to the defence of consent to trespass to the person and an extension of the duty of care expected in cases of negligence. It was foreseeable that the claimant could suffer personal injuries if there was delay. Watson v British Boxing Board of Control [2001] QB 1134 was a case of the Court of Appeal of England and Wales that established an exception to the defence of consent to trespass to the person and an extension of the duty of care expected in cases of negligence. Thereafter, when the defendant assumed responsibility for him, it accepts that the measures taken fell short of the standard reasonably to be expected. The Board professes - I do not for one moment question its sincerity - its lively interest in his safety. 101. b) A limit on the number of rounds to twelve (Rule 3.7). Treatment that should have been provided at the ringside. England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division), Watson & British Boxing Board Of Control Ltd & Anor. A. Later in the judgment the Judge suggested, by implication, that the Board's rules should have included a requirement that a boxer who was knocked out, or seemed unfit to defend himself, should be immediately seen by a doctor. The physical safety of boxers has always been a prime concern of the Board. A preliminary issue was tried as to whether Mr Usherwood and the PFA owed the Plaintiff a duty of care. Radio Times - February 1117 2023 | PDF This involved taking precautions or giving instructions for them to be taken so that the work could be done with safety. In the course of his work he assesses a pupil whose lack of progress at school has been causing concern all round: to teachers and parents alike.