43. 86. 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. It can also result in disturbance of the processes of breathing so that insufficient air is taken into the lungs to ensure adequate oxidation of the blood. We have been referred to no case where a duty of care has been established in relation to the drafting of rules and regulations which have governed the conduct of third parties towards a claimant. Administrative, Personal Injury, Negligence, Updated: 02 November 2021; Ref: scu.135634. 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. In practice the Area Secretary would select the medical officers for a particular contest, albeit that the promoter would pay them. The boxers display skill, strength and courage, but nobody pretends that they do good to themselves or others. Secondly, to identify any categories of cases in which these principles So the tortious damage may be seen as consecutive to, and aggravating, that which was inevitable. On the facts of the present case the Claimant suffered only a minor primary injury. Treatment that should have been provided at the ringside. Letang v Cooper - Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 - Watson v British Boxing Board of Control - Bernstein of Leigh v Skyviews & General Ltd -. There he arrived in the scanning room at 00.30 on 22nd September. This ground of appeal would have been unsustainable. 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. 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. [7] Paying the compensation granted to Watson, which was eventually reduced to 400,000, led to the BBBC selling their London headquarters and moving to Wales. 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 Walker's challenge to these findings was based on a single point. In 1991 there were only about 550 active boxers, of which almost all were semi-professional. 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. (Rule 8.1). 428 Nield J. drew a distinction between a casualty department of a hospital that closes its doors and says no patients can be received, in which case he would, by inference, have held there was no duty of care, and the case before him where the three watchmen, who had taken poison, entered the hospital and were given erroneous advice, where a duty of care arose. 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. Elr, Recueil JP 01.02 3 a) Case of Michels v USOC (United States Court of Appeals - 7th circuit, 16 August 1984)40 B. d) The rule that a boxer must be medically examined before every contest. 60. 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. I find this distinction between instructions as to duties and instructions as to how to perform duties elusive and over subtle. 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. 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. 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. 58. 112. I am in no doubt that the Judge's decision broke new ground in the law of negligence. In fact the Board had required a third doctor to be present and that an ambulance should be in attendance. My reaction is the same as that of Buxton L.J. Herbert Smith, London. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. I think that the Judge was right. It seems to me that the authorities support a principle that where A places himself in a relationship to B in which B's physical safety becomes dependent upon the acts or omissions of A, A's conduct can suffice to impose on A, a duty to exercise reasonable care for B's safety. The patient is then artificially ventilated through this tube with oxygen. This would mean an appointment of a Senior Medical officer specifically for the major event and then two other doctors on duty to ensure that there were always two doctors at the ringside while a major contest was taking place.". At p.1172 he summarised his conclusion as follows:-. depending upon the court's attitude to the case before it. 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. deprecated the introduction of tests such as `proximity' and `fair just and reasonable' in a situation where it was reasonably foreseeable that a failure to exercise reasonable care would cause personal injury: "They also illustrate the dangers of substituting for clear criteria, criteria which are incapable of precise definition and involve what can only be described as an element of subjective assessment by the Court: such ultimately subjective assessments tend inevitably to lead to uncertainty and anomaly which can be avoided by a more principled approach". 125. I turn to the distinctive features of this case. All involved in a boxing contest were obliged to accept and comply with the Board's requirements. If Mr Watson has no remedy against the Board, he has no remedy at all. The authority was to act on that advice in deciding what course to adopt in the best interests of the pupil with a learning difficulty. The Claimant would have been resuscitated within a few minutes of 23.00 and in St. Bartholomews by 23.45 at the latest. 2. The ordinary test of reasonable skill and care is the correct one to apply. Thus the necessary `proximity' was not made out. Michael Watson MBE, born 15 March 1965, is a British former professional boxer who competed from 1984-1991. Questions of what was fair and reasonable did not arise. In particular, the Board controlled the medical assistance that would be provided. Tort Case Law. Mr Usherwood had authority, under an Order made pursuant to the Civil Aviation Act 1982 to certify that the aircraft was fit to fly. 51. They argued that if they had failed to exercise reasonable care, this was not the direct cause of the Plaintiff's injuries - the direct cause being that the aircraft had been designed in a manner that made it unairworthy. In a nutshell, his case was that the resuscitation treatment that he received at the North Middlesex Hospital should have been available at the ringside, but was not. 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. 90. The facilities include a scheme which enables members to construct and fly their own light aircraft. The physical safety of boxers has always been a prime concern of the Board. 5. expressed a similar view in Marc Rich & Co. v Bishop Rock Ltd [1994] 1 WLR 1071 at 1077: "Whatever the nature of the harm sustained by the plaintiff, it is necessary to consider the matter not only by inquiring about foreseeability but also by considering the nature of the relationship between the parties; and to be satisfied that in all the circumstances it is fair, just and reasonable to impose a duty of care. 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. Michael Watson was injured in a boxing match supervised by the British Boxing Board of Control (BBBofC or BBBC), which was expected . At the hospital Mr Watson was given the conventional resuscitation procedure - that is intubation, ventilation, oxygen and an infusion of Manitol. It did not summon medical assistance and its supervision of him was inadequate". had not been responsible for the claimant's asthma but it had caused the respiratory arrest and to this extent the L.A.S was the author of additional damage.". There is no statutory basis for this. These cases turned upon the assumption of responsibility to an individual. In support of that proposition Mr. Walker relied upon X v Bedfordshire CC and Stovin v Wise [1996] AC 923. 109. 108. Effects are usually short-lived and do not produce lasting damage. In my judgment, there must be an affirmative answer to that question. The request for an ambulance was accepted. The child has a learning difficulty. I do not consider that a conscious reliance by the patient on the hospital to exercise care is an essential element in this duty of care. 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. Study with Quizlet and memorize flashcards containing terms like Alexandrou v Oxford (1933), Maguire v Harland & Wolff PLC (2005), Calvert v William Hill (2008) and more. By clicking on this tab, you are expressly stating that you were one of the attorneys appearing in this matter. Flashcards. 72. 65. The doctors who were actually present were not aware of the desirability of immediate resuscitation of a victim with a brain haemorrhage. But although the cases in which the courts have imposed or withheld liability are capable of an approximate categorisation, one looks in vain for some common denominator by which the existence of the essential relationship can be tested. 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. [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. 82. This passage was approved by Lord Steyn when the case reached the House of Lords [1996] AC 211 at 235. The settlement of Watson's case against the. It was a matter for Mr Watson to choose whether or not to compete subject to the Board's rules. 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". The board lost its. In order to explain these allegations, I propose to summarise the evidence on: * the nature of injuries such as those suffered by Mr Watson; * the manner in which such injuries were treated in hospital in 1991; * the manner in which such injuries should have been treated at the ringside and. The ambulance should be prepared to go direct to the Neurological unit that had been placed on stand-by. Calvert v William Hill (2008). This did not, however, affect the position so far as responsibility for the safety of the boxers was concerned. 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 Board is non-profit making. The relevant findings of the Judge were as follows:-. 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. Thus in Capital and Counties v. Hampshire this Court held that a fire brigade was under no common law duty to answer a call for help or, having done so, to exercise reasonable skill and care to extinguish the fire. It is to make regulations imposing on others the duty to achieve these results. 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. The Board next drew attention to evidence that a member of the public having sustained brain damage in a road accident would not expect to receive from the ambulance attending the scene the resuscitation service which the Judge held should have been available at the ringside. It made provision in its Rules for the medical precautions to be employed and made compliance with these Rules mandatory. I do not believe that the evidence admits of any accurate answer to this question but that is by no means an uncommon situation in cases of this sort. 120. Michael Watson was injured in a boxin 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. I can summarise the position as follows. 1, 43-44, where he said: "It is preferable, in my view, that the law should develop novel categories of negligence incrementally and by analogy with established categories, rather than by a massive extension of a prima facie duty of care restrained only by indefinable `considerations which ought to negative, or to reduce or limit the scope of the duty or the class of person to whom it is owed.". He rejected it, holding that the standard to be expected of an ambulance dealing with every kind of medical emergency was not the same as the standard to be expected from those making provision for a particular and serious risk which was one of a limited number likely to arise. James George, James George. The other group of cases involved duties imposed on local authorities in relation to children with special educational needs. "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. This appears to be an attempt to import into the law of negligence concepts of public law. James George, James George. There is no question but that anyone with the appropriate expertise would have advised such a system whatever reservations they may have had, as had Professor Teasdale, about its ultimate utility.". Held: The respondent had not assumed a general responsibility to all road users . contains alphabet). . I see no reason why the rules should not have contained the provision suggested by the Judge. A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media The first challenge to the Judge's finding on breach of duty was that he applied the wrong test. The fight had taken place in accordance with the rules of the British Boxing Board of Control Ltd., ("the Board"). Boxing members of the Board, including Mr Watson, could reasonably rely upon the Board to look after their safety. The educational psychologist was professionally qualified. "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 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. The education of the pupil is the very purpose for which the child goes to the school. 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 106. This is a further factor which tends to establish the proximity necessary for a duty of care. The General Medical Council clearly states that a doctor must offer help when off-duty, if an emergency arises. Beldam L.J. Of course.these three matters overlap with each other and are really facets of the same thing. The undertaking is to use the special skills which the doctor and hospital authorities have to treat the patient. That case involved four further claims by children against local education authorities for, among other things, negligently failing to address their special educational needs. '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.". There an operation was carried out to evacuate a sub-dural haematoma. If it had in place the appropriate protocols for provision of medical care, the claimants injuries would not have been so severe. Again I disagree. When carrying out the assessment and advising the education authority, did the psychologist owe a duty of care to the child? 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. There are many instances of this. We do not provide advice. Please log in or sign up for a free trial to access this feature. By this time, however, he had sustained serious brain damage. See Hedley Byrne & Co. Ltd. v Heller & Partners Ltd [1964] AC 465 and Henderson v Merrett Syndicates Ltd [1995] 2 AC 145. The Board, however, went far beyond this. First, Watson is apparently the first reported case in which the English He distinguished the fire and police `rescue' cases on the ground that: "This was not a case of general reliance, but specific reliance. 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. [2] The case was then appealed to the Court of Appeal of England and Wales, where a 3-judge panel consisting of Phillips MR, May LJ and Laws LJ delivered their judgment on 19 December 2000. 94. One group of cases involved statutory duties imposed on local authorities for the purpose of protecting children from child abuse. The doctor does not, by examining the applicant, come under any general duty of medical care to the applicant. 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. Mr Watson was one of a defined number of boxing members of the Board. Since 1929 the Board has been and continues to be the sole controlling body regulating professional boxing in the United Kingdom. 131. Ringside medical facilities were available, but did not provide immediate resuscitation. The defendant in each case was a local authority. Thus it has been held that the prison service owes a duty of care to take reasonable steps to prevent prisoners from committing suicide. Each case involved the performance by the local authority of duties imposed under statute for the benefit of children. 36. On 21st September 1991 Michael Watson fought Chris Eubank for the World Boxing Organisation Super-Middleweight title at Tottenham Hotspur Football Club in London. If authority is needed for this approach, it is to be found in the Judgment of the Court of Appeal in Perrett v Collins [1998] 2 LL.L.Rep. Establish an accurate diagnosis as to the intracranial pathology. ", 126. The principles alleged to give rise to a duty of care in this case are those of assumption of responsibility and reliance. Indirect Influence on the Occurrence of Injury. A primary stated object of the Board was to look after its boxing member's physical safety. about 23.01. Mr Usherwood, who alone of those involved had technical expertise, might be the only person who had been negligent. 74. 48. 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. I conclude that the Judge correctly found that the Board owed Mr Watson a duty of care. A . b) The rule that a Licence may be suspended or withdrawn if, in the opinion of the Board or an Area Council, the licence-holder is not medically fit to box (Rule 4.9(b)(I)). 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. These cases were distinguished in Kent v Griffiths [2000] 2 WLR 1158. In Cassidy v Ministry of Health [1951] 2 K.B. Thereafter, when the defendant assumed responsibility for him, it accepts that the measures taken fell short of the standard reasonably to be expected. There are also reasons of public policy for not imposing a duty of care to individuals in relation to the performance of their functions. 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. I am left with the clear impression that the Board's medical advisers have not looked outside their personal expertise. [8], "BBC Sport Poignant end to Watson's epic journey", https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Watson_v_British_Boxing_Board_of_Control&oldid=1049029766, This page was last edited on 9 October 2021, at 12:23. The hospital should be requested to confirm that a Neuro-Surgeon would be on stand-by. They also argued that it was not fair, just and reasonable that the PFA should be liable to negligence. The Board controlled every aspect of that activity. He had particular experience of brain injuries caused by sporting activities. 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. 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. Interact directly with CaseMine users looking for advocates in your area of specialization. 57. It is not clear why the ambulance took so long to reach the hospital. 73. The Bout Agreement, which was subject to the sanction of the Board, provided that: "The bout will be conducted in accordance with the rules and regulations of the WBO and BBBC". Watson v British Boxing Board of Control (2001 . Lord Steyn, however, gave short shrift to an argument based on assumption of responsibility: "Given that the cargo owners were not even aware of N.K.K. Nearly half an hour elapsed between the end of the fight and the time that he got there. They did not have the expertise in providing such resuscitation; nor did they have the necessary equipment. 62. Use our proprietary AI tool CaseIQ to find other relevant judgments with just one click. [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, however, clear that the test is an objective one: Henderson v Merrett Syndicates Ltd., [1995] 2 AC 145, 181. 20. 116. The Board's authority is essentially based upon the consent of the boxing world. In 1991 the Board had about twelve hundred licence holders and members of which about five hundred and fifty were active boxers. 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. As already stated, no tournament is allowed to commence or continue without one doctor sitting ringside. 83. In consequence, the pupil fails to receive the appropriate educational treatment and, as a result, his educational progress is retarded, perhaps irreparably. In my judgment there is a clear distinction between the role of the Board and the role of a fire service or the police service. held that. In relation to two of the cases involving special educational needs, Lord Browne-Wilkinson reached a different conclusion. 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.