A number of authorities show that an acceptance of the role (usually under statutory powers or duties) of protecting the community in general from foreseeable dangers does not carry with it a legal duty of care to safeguard individual members of the community from those dangers. "In Barnett v Chelsea & Kensington Management Committee [1969] 1 Q.B. Mon 8 Oct 2001 12.23 EDT Michael Watson will receive no more than 400,000 compensation in settlement of a damages claim worth up to 2.5m. Thus the Board was a body with special knowledge giving advice to a defined class of persons in the knowledge that it would rely upon that advice in the defined situation of boxing contests. It is not sufficient for the doctor to be in the vicinity of the ring as in the case of an emergency the speed of the doctor's reactions in treating this are all important. 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. Michael Alexander Watson v British Boxing Board of Control Ltd, World Boxing Organisation Incorporated: CA 19 Dec 2000 The claimant was seriously injured in a professional boxing match governed by rules established by the defendant's rules. 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. change. 82. He gave evidence that he agreed with Mr Hamlyn's views. 74. Watson v British Boxing Board of Control - Wikiwand As a result of the delay the patient sustained brain damage. The Board had given notice that he would be called as a witness and submitted the witness statement from him. The onlookers derive entertainment, but none of the physical and moral benefits which have been seen as the fruits of engagement in many sports.". It is worth setting out the passage of the report of the Board's expert, Dr Cartlidge, which dealt with this aspect of the case. My reaction is the same as that of Buxton L.J. Dr Shapiro examined Mr Watson and put a Brookes Airway into his mouth to maintain his airway. 132. Mr Walker urged that a duty of care should not be imposed upon the Board because it was a non profit-making organisation and did not carry insurance. It much have been in the contemplation of the architect that builders would go on the site as the whole object of the work was to erect building there. 59. The Board contended that this was unjustifiable, since it would require Rules which in effect instructed doctors as to how to perform their duties.
Winchester 22 Parts,
Baseball Announcer Script,
Granville County Schools Timekeeper,
Alabama Travel Softball Teams Looking For Players,
Cane Creek Tennessee River,
Articles W