English High Court Considers the Liability for Negligent Acts during a Football Match that Cause Serious Injury.
What happens when a professional athlete’s career gets cut short by a potentially negligent act on the field of play?
Picture this: an under 18 soccer match between Fulham FC and Swansea City FC. Nearing the end of the first half, Swansea player Jordan Jones is in possession of the ball, running towards goal along the touch line. Fulham player Jayden Harris chases after Mr Jones in a bid to stop his attempt at goal. As Mr Harris catches up to Mr Jones, he tackles him. The referee says play on. No foul. No yellow or red card.
Mr Jones cannot stand up, this tackle has resulted in a serious injury to his right ankle, ruining his professional career.
Career ending injuries are not uncommon. The significant impact that these injuries have on the physical, mental and economic well-being of the injured player can be far reaching.
So can Mr Jones pursue any legal remedy?
The above scenario is taken from English High Court decision Fulham FC v Jones. Mr Jones commenced proceedings of vicarious liability against Fulham FC for the actions of Mr Harris. Mr Jones claimed that the tackle amounted to an assault, or in the alternative, that Mr Harris was negligent.
The Trial Judgment
At trial, the claim for assault was dismissed but Fulham FC was held vicariously liable for what was labelled a breach of Mr Harris’ duty of care, for what was appropriate in the circumstances of a professional match.
It was found irrelevant that Mr Harris’ had no intention to injure, nor that the tackle was made in the heat of the game:
“it does not matter that Harris did not intend to injure the claimant or that in a general sense it can be said the tackle was made in a fast moving heat of the moment context. It was a serious error of judgment … going beyond the kind of mis-judgments, mis-timings and relatively minor or momentary lack of care which all players have to accept as an inherent risk of the game not amounting to negligence.”
Fulham’s Successful Appeal
Fulham FC appealed this decision on four grounds, and succeeded on all four, setting aside the original decision and requiring a new trial. The four grounds were that the original judge:
1) Erred in failing to apply the relevant two step test in a professional sporting context; first, determining whether the defendant breached the Laws of the Game, and secondly, determining whether there was negligence ( a materially higher standard than a mere breach of the rules of the game);
2) failed in his duty to give adequate reasons;
3) erred in law by refusing to take into account the context of Mr Harris’ tackle and the realities of playing culture in professional football e.g. fast paced, competitive and physical; and
4) erred in law by failing to take into account all the contemporaneous evidence.
Implications of the High Court’s Decision
Fulham FC v Jones highlights the high bar that must be met in order to prove civil liability for causing a serious injury in soccer, and most likely other similar sports. Having this high standard is important, as decisions relating to civil liability and sport always risk inviting mass litigation if they set a precedent that any slight error of judgement or skill could lead to civil liability.
For further information about this case, check out LawInSport’s blog piece on the case here: https://www.lawinsport.com/blogs/item/fulham-fc-v-jones-when-is-there-civil-liability-for-causing-a-serious-injury-in-football?category_id=139