observed that there was no evidence of any of the asserted potential effects of a finding of negligence against PFA. The L.A.S. The Board assumes the, 89. Had the Board said nothing, it might not be liable, but once it gave advice by setting rules, it came to be responsible. Whilst unattended he vomited and died as a result of inhaling his own vomit. The doctor does not, by examining the applicant, come under any general duty of medical care to the applicant. 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 it has been held that the prison service owes a duty of care to take reasonable steps to prevent prisoners from committing suicide. This ground of appeal would have been unsustainable. Michael Watson was injured in a boxing match supervised by the British Boxing Board of Control (BBBofC or BBBC), which was expected to . 94. Similarly none of the particular difficulties which arise in relation to economic loss arise in relation to the causing of personal injury. Thus a person may be liable for directing someone into a dangerous location (e.g. Administrative, Personal Injury, Negligence, Updated: 02 November 2021; Ref: scu.135634. said: "In my opinion authorities who run a hospital, be they local authorities, government boards, or any other corporation, are in law under the selfsame duty as the humblest doctor. Even absent such an express requirement, it seems to me that if the protocol had been in place, the doctors present should have been aware of the desirability of examining Mr Watson's condition in the circumstances that had occurred, whether or not the rules expressly required this. 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. 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. 105. At the third stage, questions of `proximity' and of what is `fair, just and reasonable' have to be considered. He further alleged that had he received that treatment, he would not have sustained permanent brain damage. 131. 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. His evidence was that it was his practice to use it where a patient was experiencing breathing difficulties. 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. This submission involves considering the timing of events and the Judge's findings in relation to the impact of these on causation. 9.39.3 (added to the Rules on 25 May 1991)). at p.262 which I have set out above. There are many instances of this. Mr Usherwood had authority, under an Order made pursuant to the Civil Aviation Act 1982 to certify that the aircraft was fit to fly. Whenever they accept a patient for treatment, they must use reasonable care and skill to cure him of his ailment.". At p.1172 he summarised his conclusion as follows:-. As already mentioned the referee is in sole charge of the contest, but if a boxer is counted out and fails to rise it is the doctor's duty to get into the ring as quickly as possible and institute emergency treatment should this be required. I propose to develop the relevant facts more fully in the context of each of these issues. The position is directly analogous with a hospital conducted, formerly by a local authority now by a health authority, in exercise of statutory powers. 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. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Michael Watson was injured in a boxin In case of any confusion, feel free to reach out to us.Leave your message here. 48. 16. These facts bring the Board into close proximity with each individual boxer who contracts with a promoter to fight under the Board's rules. 116. Plainly, however, the longer the delay, the more serious the outcome. 14. (Compare also Clay v AJ Crump & Sons Ltd [1964] 1 QB 533 in which an architect had complete control over whether a dangerous wall was left standing and Watson v British Boxing Board of Control Ltd [2001] QB 1134 in which the Board had control over the medical services provided at boxing matches.) Next the Board attacked the implicit finding of the Judge that the Rules should have required the doctor to enter the ring as soon as a boxer was counted out or deemed unfit to defend himself. 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 evidence of the expert witnesses called on behalf of Mr Watson was that the first ten minutes after loss of consciousness were critical. A primary injury such as that described can have secondary consequences which are much more serious. On the findings of the judge it was delay which caused the further injuries. 27. 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. 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. i) that it owed no duty of care to Mr Watson; ii) that if it owed the duty alleged, it committed no breach; and. Mr Hamlyn said, and I accept, that there would have been very few British neurosurgeons who at this time would have questioned the need to put up a line and administer this diuretic in a case such as the present. Where a blow to the head results in immediate impairment or loss of consciousness, this is normally the result of temporary deformation of the brain caused by acceleration or deceleration of movement of the head. A doctor must be available to give immediate attention to any boxer should this be required. It carried out this function by making and imposing rules dealing with the safety of boxers, by approving medical officers and by giving detailed guidance as to the qualifications and equipment those officers should bring to the ringside. He would thus have developed the subdural haemorrhage in the most favourable circumstances possible, short of doing so in hospital with staff around him. So far I have not dealt with the question of reliance by Mr Watson on the exercise of care by the Board. 12. In an opinion read by Phillips MR, the court upheld Kennedy's decision, noting that it "broke new ground". 123. 293.". Watson v British Boxing Board of Control (2001). Each case involved the performance by the local authority of duties imposed under statute for the benefit of children. On his initiative a meeting took place with the Minister for Sport, two of Mr Hamlyn's colleagues, the Board's Chief Medical Officer, Dr Whiteson, and other board officials on 16th October 1991. Where there is a potential for physical injury, I do not believe that I have to go beyond the traditional concept of neighbourhood to find a duty where there is, as here, a clearly foreseeable danger. 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. 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. England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division), Watson & British Boxing Board Of Control Ltd & Anor. The propeller was mismatched to the gearbox. This point was put to the Judge. 37. Mr Walker's challenge to these findings was based on a single point. The referee stopped the fight in the final round when Watson appeared to be unable to defend himself. Effects are usually short-lived and do not produce lasting damage. In the event Mr Walker did not put this pleaded Ground of Appeal at the forefront of his argument. 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. Licence holders are also required to comply with the Board's policy in respect of matters not dealt with by specific rules. As for the argument that the local authorities were vicariously liable for negligence on the part of those giving them advice, Lord Browne-Wilkinson held at pp.752-3: "The claim based on vicarious liability is attractive and simple. In order that, when complete, the aircraft can obtain first a provisional and then a full certificate of airworthiness, the assembly of the aircraft has to be supervised and checked by an inspector. 91. There are a number of problems with this submission. Against that judgment the Board now appeals. Get 1 point on providing a valid sentiment to this It shall be adequately lit, have an examination couch and possess hot and cold running water. It was foreseeable that the claimant could suffer personal injuries if there was delay. Indirect Influence on the Occurrence of Injury. There is no more justification for a blanket immunity in their cases than there was in Capital & Counties Plc v Hampshire Country Council [1997] QB 1004. (Rule 5.9(c)). That case involved four further claims by children against local education authorities for, among other things, negligently failing to address their special educational needs. In an article on injuries in professional boxing written in 1981, Dr Whiteson stated: "My task as Senior Medical Officer is to control the medical aspects of boxing and in this to liaise closely with Area Medical Officers and with the team of medical experts which includes neurologists and orthopaedic, plastic and ophthalmic surgeons". "The fact that it was a person who foreseeably would suffer further injuries by a delay in providing an ambulance, when there was no reason why it should not be provided, is important in establishing the necessary proximity and thus duty of care in this case. 132. that the negligence alleged fell into the category of directly causing foreseeable personal injury, both he and Swinton Thomas L.J. 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. No one can take part, in any capacity, in professional boxing in this Country who is not licensed by the Board and, at the same time, a member of it, for the two are essentially synonymous. A . CLUE. Any such inspector has to be approved by the association". Mr Watson collapsed unconscious within a minute or so of this. 2. 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. 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. The decision is of interest for several reasons. The ordinary test of reasonable skill and care is the correct one to apply. 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.". They alleged that the local authorities had provided services under which, in one case, educational psychologists and, in the other, advisory teachers provided advice to teaching staff and parents as to whether children had special educational needs. 58. 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. A. Apart from issues of statutory duty, the question arose in each group of cases whether (i) the local authorities owed, at common law, a duty of care to the children when considering their needs and (ii) whether professionals advising on the needs of children owed a duty of care to those children which, if broken, rendered the local authorities vicariously liable. 59. 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 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. Try and prevent and/or treat raised intracranial pressure. [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. The fight had taken place in accordance with the rules of the British Boxing Board of Control Ltd., ("the Board"). It is to make regulations imposing on others the duty to achieve these results. It seems to me that the authorities support a principle that, where A places himself in a relationship to B in which Bs physical safety becomes dependant upon the acts and omissions of A, As conduct can suffice to impose on A a duty to exercise reasonable care for Bs safety. and 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. Mr. Usherwood was the person who was carrying out this role in relation to Mr. Collins' assembly of this aircraft. Elr, Recueil JP 01.02 3 a) Case of Michels v USOC (United States Court of Appeals - 7th circuit, 16 August 1984)40 B. But the claimant does not come even remotely . It made provision in its Rules for the medical precautions to be employed and made compliance with these Rules mandatory. 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. 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. 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. 127. 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. Use our proprietary AI tool CaseIQ to find other relevant judgments with just one click. 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. 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. There are, however, authorities dealing with advice given to third parties that foreseeably resulted in injury to the person or property of claimants. Before confirming, please ensure that you have thoroughly read and verified the judgment. The normal duty of a doctor to exercise reasonable skill and care is well established as a common law duty of care. Creating your profile on CaseMine allows you to build your network with fellow lawyers and prospective clients. 60. In that case Hobhouse L.J. In theory the medical officers at a contest would be appointed and paid by the Promoter from the body of approved doctors. He said that a report had identified the risks. The onlookers derive entertainment, but none of the physical and moral benefits which have been seen as the fruits of engagement in many sports.". 107. 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. 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. 103. Watson v British Boxing Board, above Michael v South Wales Police, above ABC v St George's Healthcare NHS Trust . Match. 99. There was no contract between the parties, but boxers had to fight under the Board's rules. 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. There was no contract between the parties, but boxers had to fight under the Boards rules. 106. 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. 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. Likewise, in Watson v British Boxing Board of Control [2001] QB 1134 the defendant was found to owe a duty of care to the Plaintiff boxer who had suffered more significant injury b.. Request a trial to view additional results 1 firm's commentaries Heading The Ball: Part Of The Game Or An Industrial Disease United Kingdom Mondaq UK The fight was terminated at 22.54. Calvert v William Hill (2008).