SPORT AND THE LAW
What influences does the law
have on sport?
OVERVIEW
• Sport is an integral part of society and increasingly attracts
regulation
• Changing values and the commercialisation of sport have
increased legal implications for stakeholders
• The law creates rights and obligations for participants,
coaches, officials and other stakeholders
• Dispute resolution is normally the responsibility of the
relevant sporting organisation
• The court system (both civil and criminal jurisdictions) can
also play an important role in resolving disputes in sport
• Individuals can seek compensation for injuries suffered
through negligent or deliberate conduct on the sporting
field
• The criminal law can intervene and prosecute cases of onfield violence
Key terms / vocabulary
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Balance of probabilities
Banned substances
Consent
Contributory negligence
Damages
Defences
Doping
Duty of care
Express consent
Monopoly
Morality clause
Key terms / vocabulary
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Implied consent
Negligence
Performance-enhancing substance
Proximity
Reasonably foreseeable
Recreational drugs
Restraint of trade
Standard of care
Torts
Volenti non fit injuria
Voluntary assumption of risk
World anti-doping agency
Key terms / vocabulary
• Discrimination
• Racism
• Duty of care.docx
• Negligence.docx
• Tort.docx
Negligence Case Study
15 year old Raylene Booker was a promising
young soccer player in a Saturday morning
district soccer competition. In last Saturday’s
semi-finals, when trying to tackle an
opponent, Raylene broke her leg in 3 places.
The doctors have said she will never play
again. Raylene’s parents, already upset with
the injury, were unhappy with the coach’s
explanation of the incident and decided to
find out exactly what happened.
They discovered that before the game
Raylene had told the coach that she did
not feel well and did not want to play. The
coach reminded Raylene of the game’s
importance and urged her to play anyway
and to ‘just do her best’. When Raylene’s
team was warming up, several players
noted deep ruts in the field. Concerned
about the danger of turning an ankle, the
players informed the coach. The coach
told them to try to avoid the holes and he
failed to raise the problem with the game
referee.
Midway through the first half, the accident
occurred. Attempting a tackle, Raylene’s foot
was caught in a rut and a much larger
opponent fell onto her fixed leg. Everyone
heard a terrible crack. The coach decided
not to wait for an ambulance but rushed
Raylene in his own car to the hospital about 5
km away from the ground. Raylene was in
terrible pain when the players carried her
over to the coach’s car. The ruts were left in
the field following ‘improvement work’ that
was undertaken during the week by the local
council, after a request from the club. The
soccer club leases the ground from the
council.
QUESTIONS
1. Did the coach owe Raylene a duty of
care?
Yes. Supervisors owe a duty of care to
all the participants
2. Did the coach breach that duty?
• Several facts need to be considered here,
for example,
– the coach ignored Raylene’s request not to
play;
– he knew the field was not suitable for play;
– he did not follow recommended procedure
for treating the leg.
• The coach allowed Raylene to face
unacceptable risks.
3. Who else may be negligent?
• The courts have shown that owners and
occupiers of facilities (in this case, the
council and the club) have a responsibility
to ensure that the facilities they provide
are suitable for the purpose for which
they will be used.
Your sport
• What is the difference between ‘rules’ and
‘laws’ Explain
• What influences does the law have in your
sport?
• Comment on the statement “what happens
on the field stays on the field”
TERMINOLOGY
• Assault – threatening to commit or
committing physical harm (criminal law);
threatening to commit physical harm (civil
law)
• Balance of probabilities – the standard of
proof in a civil trial. That is, the plaintiff or
applicant must prove that the matter being
alleged is more likely that not to have
happened.
• Battery – the use of physical force against
another person which results in injury
• Civil law – an area of law covering the
infringement of a person’s rights. The aim
of the is to compensate
• Criminal law – the area of law which deals
with aspects of criminal conduct
• Damages – a payment in money awarded
to a plaintiff who succeeds in proving that
the defendant caused him or her to suffer
an injury, loss or infringement of rights.
• Defamation – unlawfully damaging a
person’s reputation
• Defences – pleadings recognised by law
that allow a defendant to justify his or her
conduct. Defences may be complete or
partial, which mean they may allow the
person charged to be acquitted if accepted
by the court, or they may result in a lesser
charge.
• Duty of care – responsibility to ensure the
safety of those who may be affected by
acts or omissions.
• Implied consent – in relation to sport, a
player is said to consent to those things
that are inherent in a particular sport, so
behaviour normal to that sport is covered
by implied consent.
• Legislation – law created by Parliament;
also known as statute law.
• Negligence – situation where a person
breaches a duty to take reasonable care to
avoid foreseeable risk, resulting in a
person being injured or suffering a risk
• Restraint of trade – when a person signs a
contract limiting their right to pursue a
career or trade, the law views it with
suspicion. If the contract is unreasonable,
not in the best interests of the player, or
not in the public interest, then the law may
not enforce it or will cut out he offending
portion from the contract
• Standard of proof – degree to which the
party bringing a case must prove their
argument. In civil cases, the standard of
proof is on the balance of probabilities; in
criminal cases, it is beyond reasonable
doubt
• Sue – to initiate civil proceedings against
another individual or party for causing you
damage or injury
• Volenti non fit injuria – ‘no harm can be
done to one who consents’, or voluntary
assumption of risk. It is reasonable for the
law to assume that someone who
participates in a recreational or leisure
activity is expected to understand the
hazards and the potential injury risks
involved and consent to the risks.
What’s your verdict
• If you were the judge in the following
cases, what would be your decision and
what would be the reasons for your
decision?
• Case Study 1
While playing football. A deliberately
strikes B on the side of the head with
an elbow, causing serious injury:
namely, a blood clot to the brain and
a degree of permanent disability. A
argues that as foul play sometimes
occurs in football, B impliedly
consented to it. Can B sue A? If so,
for what?
• Case Study 2
W allegedly spear-tackled L; that is he picked
up L and threw him, head first into the
ground. As a result, L is a quadriplegic. W
was sent off the ground, and one week later
the tribunal cleared him of the spear-tackle
incident.
Such tackles are illegal under the rules of the
game of Rugby League.
W said he chased after L and tackled him, L
said he had been spear tackled and W’s
lawyers said there was reasonable doubt.
• Consider the following incidents. Decide what
you think the outcome for each incident should be
and give reasons for your decisions
(a) Smith is instructed by the coach to put an
opponent out of the football game. He does
so with a hit to the back of the neck and puts
the opponent player in hospital
(b) Lily Thomson bowls five consecutive head
high bumpers against Ann Jones, striking her
on the temple with the last ball. Jones dies
and Thomson is arrested and charged with
manslaughter
(c) A player, Lee, in trying to gather a rugby
ball, delivers a hip and shoulder bump fairly
to an opponent. The opponent sustains
internal injuries as a result of the tackle.
Consider your verdict
• Case Study
A rodeo spectator, P, was injured when struck by a bullock,
which had escaped from the arena by clearing a fence that
was about 1.5m high. P argued that G, the organiser, had
been negligent in failing to take precautions to make the
premises safe, given the nature of the entertainment, and in
not taking sufficient care to ensure that their display was held
without undue risk to spectators.
G argued that the risk of escaping bullocks was so remote as
to be negligible. G argued it had happened only twice before
in these contests. P argued that because beasts had
escaped on some occasions, this established the possibility
that such an accident was not so unlikely as to relieve G of
the obligation to provide a fence of adequate height to protect
spectators against an escaping animal.
If you were the judge, what would be your decision? State the
reasons for your decision.
Can they sue?
1. Person A was walking outside a golf club
when he was struck on the head by a golf
ball hit from the club’s fairway. A was
knocked out and, after regaining
consciousness, he suffered from double
vision and migraines.
2. Person B was swimming in the Lorne Pubto-Pier race when she was struck on the foot
by the propeller of a small boat containing
race officials. Her foot was badly cut and
required 100 stitches. She could not work
for one month.
Can they sue?
3. Person C was sitting near the on-field
boundary of the MCG during the NSW vs
Vic one-day cricket match. C was abusing
the nearby NSW fielder who, in anger,
turned and threw dirt into C’s eyes. C
required St John Ambulance medical
attention, and felt a fool as the incident
was replayed on the big screen at the
ground.
Can they sue?
4. Person D was a footballer who took a
high-flying mark above the pack a the
Collingwood vs Carlton game at the MCG.
On landing, he struck the top of an
exposed in-ground sprinkler and broke his
ankle. He was unable to play for the next
matches and lost his match payments
Can they sue?
5. Person E, a professional hockey player with
the Kangaroos, came back to first-class level
after damaging her knee. As the situation in
the game was urgent, the coach instructed
her to go straight onto the field without a
warm-up. Within 5 mins, she had torn a
ligament and took no further part in the game.
She had to go into hospital for surgery and
lost six months wages and her sponsorship
deal with Hockey Sports Stores.
Can they sue?
6. Person F, during a sports broadcast of
the Australian Open on SPORTSMAD
radio, said that G, a famous tennis player,
was ‘past it, unmotivated and too slow to
make his shots’.
Consider
• In the Australian State ‘limited over’ cricket
competition, members of the crowd are
encouraged to catch any sixes hit over the
fence, and the receive a $100 reward for
doing so.
• What happens if the ball hits a spectator or
someone is injured in the melee that
occurs when several people try to collect
the ball?
Consider
• In August 1998, former AFL player Phil
Krakouer received $90,000 in damages
for pain and suffering and economic
loss for a knee injury he received when
his foot stuck in a muddy part of the
MCG during a match.
• He sued the MCG as occupier, the AFL
as organiser, and North Melbourne as
his employer.
Protecting Passers By
• Organisers have a liability to people
passing by outside a sporting ground or
course. The law sees them as strangers,
neither player nor spectator, but people
who happen to be in the vicinity and are
injured.
• Occupiers of a cricket ground were found not
negligent when a six hit out of the ground
struck a passer-by. Such an event had never
happened before and was therefore not
foreseeable. Also, taking reasonable
precautions could not have prevented it. This
was the case of Bolton v Stone.
• In 1947, Miss Stone was standing outside her
house in Cheetham Hill, when she was struck
by a ball hit out of the ground of the nearby
cricket club. The ball had travelled nearly
100m from the pitch, and 5m above ground
level, over a high fence, and was said to be
quite exceptional.
• Negligence was not proven and Miss
Stone lost.
• On appeal to the Court of Appeal,
however, the decision was reversed. The
court decided that the cricket club,
knowing that balls had been hit over the
fence, owed a duty of care to prevent
injury to users of the highway, that they
had failed to exercise this care, and were
liable for damages.
• Finally though, the Court of Appeal decision
was reversed in the House of Lords. Lord
Radcliffe said there ‘was nothing unfair in the
defendants being required to compensate
the plaintiff’.
• However, he continued, ‘the law of
negligence is not concerned with what is fair,
but with what is culpable’. It was held that
the risk of injury to someone on the highway
was so small that it was not negligent for the
club to disregard it and to fail to take any
precautions against it such as moving the
pitch or raising the fence.
HOMEWORK
• Outline the ways in which players participating in
sport could:
– Be subject to police prosecution
– Be subject to court action from another player
• Define assault, battery and duty of care, as if you are
assisting a sporting club committee
• To what extent can a sports player be prosecuted for
sports-related assaults in Victoria
FINAL QUESTIONS
• Would you play with or against a player
with HIV?
• Why should a local sporting club be
incorporated?