Seamus Coleman: Negligence, Reckless Play & club remedies for players injured on international duty

Image source: Getty Images

Friday night's World Cup qualifier between the Republic of Ireland and Wales took a turn for the worst, in the 69th minute, when Seamus Coleman (ROI and Everton) sustained a double fracture to his tibia and fibula, on the right leg, when Neil Taylor (Wales and Aston Villa) "went in hard" on Coleman with his studs up. 

Coleman was stretchered off the pitch and the following day, underwent surgery to have metal pins inserted to fuse the bones together. He is now expected to be out of action for at least six months. At this stage, there has been no suggestion that the injury is career-ending but it is undoubtedly a horrendous career-threatening injury. The challenge has since been widely criticised by football professionals and fans alike, with some calling it reckless and negligent but what constitutes negligent, reckless play, in law?

Proving negligence

To succeed in an action of negligence, the victim player must be able to prove three things:

1. That he was owed a duty of care
2. That that duty of care was breached
3. The damage suffered was caused by that breach

In contact sports, such as football or rugby, all participants owe a duty of care to one another. In order to show a breach of that duty, conduct must be reckless and fall below the standard required of a reasonably skilful and competent professional player. It must be an act that is more serious than an error of judgement. Thereafter, the injury suffered must be foreseeable. For example, it must be the type of injury that one would expect from a foul or tackle. Given that, the test for negligence in the sporting world is a high threshold to meet.

In the game of football, a case for negligence will fail if the pursuer is unable to prove anything other than an error of judgement. A defender must have acted recklessly, with lack of care, so as to breach his duty to exercise reasonable care in all the circumstances.

In order to prove a successful case for sporting injury, you must ingather as much evidence as possible to support your case. Below is a summary of some evidence that may assist your case:

• Photographic or video evidence
• Eye-witnesses
• Referee Opinion
• Expert Evidence

In sport, it is not always the assailant who is open to being sued – players, clubs, governing bodies and referees can also find themselves subject to legal action.

European Parliament approves revised EU gun law but what does it mean for target shooters

Image source: sportScotland

The European Parliament is one step closer to implementing new stricter gun laws across the European Union, by endorsing a provisional deal, on the EU firearms directive, that was reached by Parliament and Council negotiators back in December 2016. 

The amendments come off the back of the Paris terror attacks and place an obligation on EU member states to have an appropriate monitoring system in place for the issue and renewal of firearm licenses and tighter controls on blank-firing 'acoustic' weapons and inadequately deactivated weapons. Following pressure from Parliament, the EU Commission has also pledged to adopt revised deactivation standards, by the end of May 2017, in order to ensure that deactivated firearms are rendered irreversibly inoperable.

Under the revised EU Firearms Directive, firearm types will be divided into three categories: A, B & C. 

• Category A firearms = Prohibited except for certain types of individuals
• Category B firearms = Authorisation required
• Category C firearms = Ownership requires declared but no authorisation required

The revised provisions also includes stricter controls on certain semi-automatic firearms when fitted with high capacity magazines and on automatic firearms that have been converted into semi-automatics. Those types of firearms will fall under the prohibited 'category A' but target-shooters need not be concerned as the sport falls under a special exemption.

Target shooters will be familiar with the types of firearm that fall under the prohibited category A but member states will, however, be able to give Category A authorisations to target shooters provided the individual is actively practising for or participating in shooting competitions. This applies to those who are entering the sport as well as those already competing. As such, the current freedom of choice of equipment is not restricted and the rules will be updated to cover firearms held by target shooters. 

What's Next? 

The law is still in draft form and requires to be formally approved by the EU Council of Ministers. Member States will thereafter have 15 months from the date of entry into force of the directive to transpose the new rules into national law and 30 months to put in place data-filing systems for registering the relevant information to allow for the tracing and identification of firearms. 

IMPORTANT: This post is not intended to be a legal briefing, it is not intended to be a statement of the law and no action should be taken in reliance on it without specific legal advice.

How the British Boxing Board of Control attempts to govern conduct outside the ring

Image source: Daily Mail

The British Boxing Board of Control (BBBC) is the governing body of professional boxing in the UK and as well as governing conduct whilst in-the-ring, it also controls conduct outside of the ring. 

Under Regulation 25 of the rules and regulations, the BBBC can call any member to appear before it in connection with any allegation of misconduct, made by any person. Misconduct rules are usually drafted widely in order to catch a number of different acts that may bring the sport into disrepute and are often criticised due to the uncertainty of what behaviour is caught under the rule. Generally speaking, if the behaviour or comment could be considered as risky or offensive to a particular group of persons, it is best to err on the side of caution and avoid it. In terms of boxing, the conduct rules do, however, include irresponsible or unsavoury outbursts during press conferences, and interviews, leading up to the big fight. More recently, the rules have also covered comments made on social media.  

Following an investigation of a misconduct allegation, the governing body, has the power to make any order as they see fit, in the event that they consider that the action does indeed fit the criteria for a finding of misconduct. In determining the finding, the BBBC will be required to determine whether the conduct is likely to bring the sport into disrepute. Sanctions can include withdrawal or suspension of license as well as fines. 

The BBBC announced earlier this week that it would be investigating comments made by boxer, David Haye, at a recent press conference ahead of his fight against Tony Bellew. Both fighters had been previously warned of their conduct at a press conference at the tail end of last year after the pair clashed. 

At a most recent press conference, Haye called Bellew's fans, "f***ing retards" and during media interviews, threatened to put Bellew in hospital by doing serious damage to his head. He warned that Bellew should ensure that his family do not watch, as a result. The BBBC was quoted as stating that the comments were very disappointing and it would be discussed at a meeting on March 8th.

The BBBC takes the comments of boxers, during press-conferences and any interviews, very seriously and any unsavoury remarks will not be tolerated, especially given the current climate of head injuries in sport and off the back of a dark year for boxing, with the death of Scottish boxer, Mike Towell and an injury that saw boxer, Nick Blackwell put into a coma.