Court dismisses referee's appeal
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.The Court of Appeal's decision yesterday that a referee was to blame for crippling injuries suffered by the teenager Ben Smoldon has widespread implications for rugby union.
The referee, Staffordshire official Michael Nolan, 54, had his appeal against an earlier High Court ruling dismissed. Smoldon, now 22, will spend the rest of his life in a wheelchair after breaking his neck when a scrum collapsed during an under-19 colts match between Sutton Coldfield and Burton more than five years ago. The High Court ruled last April that Nolan did not exercise reasonable care and skill in refereeing the scrums. Between 18 and 24 scrums collapsed at various stages of the game.
The RFU said the ruling had "extended the scope of potential liability for sporting officials, and this must have implications for the playing and refereeing of the game.
"The position would seem to be that, if in the opinion of the Court, the standard of care applied by the officials controlling a game, for whatever reason, even inexperience, falls below the standard of care the Court deems appropriate, they may be held liable for any injuries which may result. Our first and foremost concern is for the safety of all participants in the game. This we shall continue to strive for to our utmost ability."
The court case has shown that refereeing a physical contact sport had now become a risky business in terms of insurance requirements and potential damages claims.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments