Michael Watson was injured in a boxing match supervised by the British Boxing Board of Control (BBBofC or BBBC), which was expected . Match. . This concludes my consideration of cases dealing with the assumption of responsibility to exercise reasonable care to safeguard a victim from the consequences of an existing personal injury or illness. Michael Watson MBE, born 15 March 1965, is a British former professional boxer who competed from 1984-1991. In contrast the injuries which are sustained by professional boxers are the foreseeable, indeed inevitable, consequence of an activity which the Board sponsors, encourages and controls. Mr Watson belonged to a class which was within the contemplation of the Board. 33. 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.". [5] Phillips noted that the BBBC had taken control of medically supervising the sport, and that the duty of care was not just to avoid injuries, but "to ensure that injuries already sustained are properly treated". Click here to remove this judgment from your profile. In particular they are boxers. In fact the Board had required a third doctor to be present and that an ambulance should be in attendance. 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. 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. A doctor, an accountant and an engineer are plainly such a person. Held: The respondent had not assumed a general responsibility to all road users . James George, James George. Next Mr Walker argued that the Board did not create the danger of injury or the need for medical assistance. In theory the medical officers at a contest would be appointed and paid by the Promoter from the body of approved doctors. The Judge's reference to Mr Hamlyn was to a Neurosurgeon who operated on Mr Watson at St Bartholomew's Hospital and who gave evidence on his behalf at the trial. First published on Wed 5 Oct 2022 07.44 EDT The murky business of boxing was thrown into a fresh crisis when the promoter Eddie Hearn refused to accept a ruling by the British Boxing Board. 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. I shall have to examine the facts and reasoning in Perrett in due course, for Mr Mackay, QC, for Mr Watson has relied upon it as providing a close analogy with the present case. He won a historic High Court case in Sept 1999, raising questions about the future of the professional sport in the UK. 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. That is true as a fact. This involves intubation, or the insertion of an endotracheal tube. If such head teacher gives advice to the parents, then in my judgment he must exercise the skills and care of a reasonable teacher in giving such advice. 92. The latter have the role of protecting the public in general against risks, which they play no part in creating. The promoters and the boxers do not themselves address considerations of safety. That argument was rejected. The local council had waived a requirement that the balustrade meet the . 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. Lord Woolf M.R. Flashcards. Each emphatically concluded that it was. 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.". The background to this case was described by Hobhouse L.J. 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 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. This seems to me to be, on its face, an example par excellence of a situation where the law will regard the professional as owing a duty of care to a third party as well as his own employer.". 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.". I shall revert to the details of this when I come to consider the question of breach. 131. Such a concept belongs to the law of trespass not to the law of negligence".. "Where the plaintiff belongs to a class which either is or ought to be within the contemplation of the defendant and the defendant by reason of his involvement in an activity which gives him a measure of control over and responsibility for a situation which, if dangerous, will be liable to injure the plaintiff, the defendant is liable if as a result of his unreasonable lack of care he causes a situation to exist which does in fact cause the plaintiff injury. Center circle: In the center circle, jot down the name of your stated goalin this case, Create an Audio Educational Program. In practice the Area Secretary would select the medical officers for a particular contest, albeit that the promoter would pay them. 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. There are, however, authorities dealing with advice given to third parties that foreseeably resulted in injury to the person or property of claimants. 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 It is always better to err on the side of caution and even if a boxer has recovered sufficiently to leave the ring unaided, if and when he returns to the dressing room he exhibits any sign of persistent concussion or admits to any persistent headaches, visual disturbance or vomiting he should be immediately transferred to the local hospital where the expert advice of Neurologists and Neurosurgeons can be obtained. On the evidence I consider that the Judge was entitled to find that, even if resuscitation had not been commenced until after help was summoned, it would probably have resulted in a significantly better outcome for Mr Watson. The provision made by those rules in relation to medical assistance was plain. 97. The Board accepted these recommendations and promulgated them by way of guidance. [2] He was given no oxygen, and first sent to a hospital which lacked a neurosurgery unit. It is, however, clear that the test is an objective one: Henderson v Merrett Syndicates Ltd., [1995] 2 AC 145, 181. 2. In the leading judgment Hobhouse L.J. 68. .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. In that case Hobhouse L.J. It is to make regulations imposing on others the duty to achieve these results. The wall had remained standing because the architect employed in supervising the building works had failed to advise that it was dangerous and should be demolished. 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. 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. The decision is of interest for several reasons. The Board called to give evidence Mr Peter Richards, a Consultant Neuro-Surgeon with Charing Cross Hospital between 1987 and 1995. 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. So far as the promoter was concerned, these delimited his obligations. This contention had some similarities to submissions made in relation to the Popular Flying Association in Perrett v Collins. A duty of care at this stage had been conceded by the Ministry of Defence, but in Capital and Counties v. Hampshire this Court commented at p.1038 that this was not surprising as the deceased was under the command of the officer concerned. Mr Morris, commenting in his Witness Statement on the Statement of Claim, stated: "We do collaborate with the medical profession, indeed we believe that our Rules are as good as currently can be devised, taking into account the medical interests of the boxers, and the requirements of the sport itself. 25. 114. It is supplied to amateur flyers in a kit form which they can then assemble for themselves. In these circumstances the task is to look at the circumstances in which specific factors have given rise to the duty of care and to consider whether, on the facts of this case, they should also give rise to such a duty. His comment that "it would only have added three minutes or so if he had waited until he was summoned" suggests to the contrary. Once the defendant had become involved in the activity which gives rise to the risk, he comes under the duty to act reasonably in all respects relevant to that risk. 65. ", 38. at p.262 which I have set out above. iii) that the breach of duty alleged did not cause Mr Watson's injuries. 123. 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. In such circumstances A's conduct can accurately be described as the assumption of responsibility for B, whether `responsibility' is given its lay or legal meaning. The defendant company had a policy for achieving responsible gambling, . The facts of this case are not common to other sports. 36. The present case can only be decided on the basis of an intense and particular focus on all its distinctive features, and then applying established legal principles to it.". It trades under the name of the "Popular Flying Association" and it appears that either its main role or one of its main roles is to run that association. Nor has it been a requirement that the defendant should inflict the injury upon the plaintiff. 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". QUIZ. These can be divided into three categories: i) rules designed to ensure that a boxer is not permitted to fight unless he is fit. The North Middlesex Hospital had no neurosurgical department, so Mr Watson was transferred by ambulance, still unconscious, to St. Bartholomew's Hospital. The owner of the aircraft took off, with the Plaintiff onboard as a passenger. Dealing with the arguments of policy advanced on behalf of PFA, Buxton L.J. Furthermore, if an ambulance service is called and agrees to attend the patient, those caring for the patient normally abandon any attempt to find an alternative means of transport to the hospital". 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. In the event those same procedures could not have been begun before 23.25 at the earliest, to allow some time for an examination after the claimant's recorded time of arrival at the North Middlesex. 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. The principles alleged to give rise to a duty of care in this case are those of assumption of responsibility and reliance. 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. 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. Throughout, the child was very dependent upon the expert's assessment. The doctor does not, by examining the applicant, come under any general duty of medical care to the applicant. Lord Oliver at p.633 also emphasised the difficulty of using the three requirements as a practical guide to the existence of a duty of care. The architect, by reason of his contractual arrangement with the building owner, was charged with the duty of preparing the necessary plans and making arrangements for the manner in which the work should be done. The ambulance took him to North Middlesex Hospital, which was less than a mile away. True it is that, in the absence of a statutory power or duty, the authority could not offer such a service. 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. Had the Board said nothing, it might not be liable, but once it gave advice by setting rules, it came to be responsible. He claimed that the Board had been under a duty of care to see that all reasonable steps were taken to ensure that he received immediate and effective medical attention and treatment should he sustain injury in the fight. Search for more papers by this author. Instead he argued that even if resuscitation had been used, it would have been used too late to affect the outcome. 72. Dr Shapiro examined Mr Watson and put a Brookes Airway into his mouth to maintain his airway. 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. It was foreseeable that the claimant could suffer personal injuries if there was delay. They did not have the expertise in providing such resuscitation; nor did they have the necessary equipment. 27. This appears to be an attempt to import into the law of negligence concepts of public law. In the second place it was not practical to use this equipment while the ambulance was on the move. [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. This can, of itself, result in the restriction of the supply of oxygen to the brain. 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. This care was insufficient, and as such Watson was in a coma for 40 days, and spent 6 years in a wheelchair. 80. 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.
Patricia Morrow Photos,
What Is The Importance Of Special Crime Investigation?,
Nelson County Va Police Scanner,
Articles W