113. This increases the oxygen in the blood and reduces the level of carbon dioxide. The body set up by the Board that gave particular consideration to safety standards was a Medical Committee, sometimes referred to as The Medical Panel, that was set up in 1950. Study with Quizlet and memorize flashcards containing terms like Alexandrou v Oxford (1933), Maguire v Harland & Wolff PLC (2005), Calvert v William Hill (2008) and more. The principles alleged to give rise to a duty of care in this case are those of assumption of responsibility and reliance. There is no statutory basis for this. A defendant seeking to disturb the findings of fact of a trial Judge in relation to causation undertakes a hard task. 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. The setting of rules could be akin to the giving of advice and thus had an indirect influence on the occurrence of the injury. Elr, Recueil JP 01.02 3 a) Case of Michels v USOC (United States Court of Appeals - 7th circuit, 16 August 1984)40 B. There is a general reliance by the public on the fire service and the police to reduce those risks. He held that anyone with the appropriate expertise would have advised the adoption of such a system. 79. By then, so he submitted, the evidence established that the damage would have been done. I consider that the Judge could properly have done so. 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. The material passages of this advice were as follows:-. contains alphabet). 2. Michael Watson was a boxer who, on 21 September 1991, fought Chris Eubank under the supervision of the British Boxing Board of Control (BBBC), the British professional boxing governing body. Applied Barrett v Ministry of Defence CA 3-Jan-1995 The deceased was an off-duty naval airman. If so, it is misguided. I consider that these were proper findings on the evidence and that Mr Watson's case on breach of duty was made out. iii) to decide whether these principles should be applied so as to give rise to a duty of care in the present case. ii) the duty alleged is not directly, through the servants or agents of the Board to provide proper facilities and administer proper treatment to those injured. The brain benefits from the increased supply of oxygen and from a reduction in intra-cranial pressure in so far as this was attributable to excessive carbon dioxide. This argument was allied to Mr Walker's submission that the Judge should not have found that the rules should have required immediate medical attention to be given to a boxer where his physical condition led to the contest being stopped. 78. So in my view is an educational psychologist or psychiatrist and a teacher including a teacher in a specialised area, such as a teacher concerned with children having special educational needs. 26. 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. It is supplied to amateur flyers in a kit form which they can then assemble for themselves. So the tortious damage may be seen as consecutive to, and aggravating, that which was inevitable. On the facts of the present case the Claimant suffered only a minor primary injury. In these circumstances there was insufficient proximity between the Board and the objects of the duty. The witness best placed to deal with the consideration, if any, given to this matter would have been Mr Whiteson. While I do not agree with Mr Mackay's submission that Perrett v Collins provides a close analogy to the present case, I do find helpful the formulation of legal principle by Hobhouse L.J. The Judge was impressed with the fact that, even then, resuscitation would have been commenced at least twenty and probably thirty minutes before in fact it was. 1, 43-44, where he said: "It is preferable, in my view, that the law should develop novel categories of negligence incrementally and by analogy with established categories, rather than by a massive extension of a prima facie duty of care restrained only by indefinable `considerations which ought to negative, or to reduce or limit the scope of the duty or the class of person to whom it is owed.". The Claimant would have been resuscitated within a few minutes of 23.00 and in St. Bartholomews by 23.45 at the latest. In other words, he could have been resuscitated on site and then transferred for more specific care. held at p.557: "Is this a case in which it can be said that the plaintiff was closely and directly affected by the acts of the architect as to have been reasonably in his contemplation when he was directing his mind to the acts or omissions which are called into question? In the course of his work he assesses a pupil whose lack of progress at school has been causing concern all round: to teachers and parents alike. The local hospital was close to the boxing ring and therefore the transfer occurred very quickly and during this period of time, as far as I can ascertain, his condition was satisfactory and the insertion of an endotrachael tube was not absolutely necessary. The Board did not insure against liability in negligence. 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. 73. Capital and Counties plc v. Hampshire County Council, Hotson v East Berkshire Area Health Authority. In particular they are boxers. 61. It is on this basis that it is possible to draw a distinction between the doctor who goes to the assistance of the victim of a road accident and the hospital that receives that victim into its casualty department. radio ", The Regime Applying to the Contest Between Watson and Eubank. In my view the Claimant makes his case on causation when he shows, as he has done, that with the protocol in place he would have been attended from the outset by a doctor skilled in resuscitation, who would have made any necessary inquiries of the neurosurgeons at St. Bartholomews, who would themselves have been on notice. 70. This duty involved the exercise of professional skills in investigating the circumstances of the plaintiffs and (in the Newham case) conducting the interview with the child. 33. . Establish an accurate diagnosis as to the intracranial pathology. The normal duty of a doctor to exercise reasonable skill and care is well established as a common law duty of care. Any loss of consciousness was short lived - he regained his feet and walked to his corner. [7] Paying the compensation granted to Watson, which was eventually reduced to 400,000, led to the BBBC selling their London headquarters and moving to Wales. England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division), Watson & British Boxing Board Of Control Ltd & Anor. A. The duty of the Board and of those advising it on medical matters, was to be prospective in their thinking and seek competent advice as to how a recognised danger could be combated. Another example was a general direction given, at about the same time, that an ambulance and crew should be in attendance at a boxing contest. 7. A little later he said "As Chief Medical Officer, my approach has always been that preventative controls are the key to making a physically hazardous sport as safe as possibleour interest in preventative controls covers the whole gamut of professional boxing.". 87. Before confirming, please ensure that you have thoroughly read and verified the judgment. I would simply comment that if the Board were given the statutory function of directing what medical assistance should be provided to boxers at the stadium, I consider that it would be at least arguable that they owed boxers a duty of care in exercising that function. that the negligence alleged fell into the category of directly causing foreseeable personal injury, both he and Swinton Thomas L.J. He rejected it, holding that the standard to be expected of an ambulance dealing with every kind of medical emergency was not the same as the standard to be expected from those making provision for a particular and serious risk which was one of a limited number likely to arise. 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. Watson v British Boxing Board of Control[2001] QB 1134was a case of the Court of Appeal of England and Walesthat established an exception to the defence of consent to trespass to the personand an extension of the duty of care expected in cases of negligence. 115. Professor Teasdale had some reservations about the effectiveness of some of this, but he accepted that this was standard practice. 11. There are also reasons of public policy for not imposing a duty of care to individuals in relation to the performance of their functions. Therefore in giving that advice he owes a duty to the child to exercise the skill and care of a reasonable advisory teacher.". They support the proposition that the act of undertaking to cater for the medical needs of a victim of illness or injury will generally carry with it the duty to exercise reasonable care in addressing those needs. The duty alleged is a duty owed to a determinate class - professional boxers who are members of the Board. Had he been asked in the period before the Eubank/Watson fight to advise on precautions in relation to the risk of serious head injury, he said that he would have given the same advice as Mr Hamlyn. He criticised the Judge for saying that there was no difference in principle between "giving advice about safety and laying down rules to provide for safety". After recovering consciousness, he sued the BBBC in negligence, and was awarded approximately 1 million by the High Court of Justice, who determined that the relationship between the BBBC and Watson was sufficient to create a duty of care. The most material part of this reads: "The Senior Medical Officer shall arrange for full and adequate resuscitation equipment (including intubation and ventilation equipment) to be available at the ringside of the venue. 3. It was accepted that, if the survey had been negligent the loss of the cargo was a foreseeable consequence. He should certainly carry an aphygomamometer and stethoscope, an ophthalmoscope, an auroscope, a patella hammer, a Brooks airway and a padded spatula in case of a rate occurrence of fitting and the need to establish an airway. In this way the Board reduces this aspect of the promoter's responsibility to the boxer to the contractual obligation to comply with the requirements of the Board's Rules in relation to the provision of medical facilities and assistance. It is said, rightly, that in general such professional duty of care is owed irrespective of contract and can arise even where the professional assumes to act for the plaintiff pursuant to a contract with a third party: Henderson v Merrett Syndicates Ltd [1995] 2 AC 145; White v Jones [1995] 2 AC 207. I personally don't think that the decision to follow option B as opposed to option A had any material affect upon Watson.", The Medical facilities provided to Mr Watson at the ringside, 102. [1988] 1 AC 1074 at 1090; and Hotson v East Berkshire Area Health Authority [1987] 1 AC 750 at 783. But the claimant does not come even remotely . It has limited liability. 68. In any event I believe that this point vanishes when causation is considered. 9.39.3 (added to the Rules on 25 May 1991)). There was no contract between the parties, but boxers had to fight under the Boards rules. James George, James George. The Board's authority is essentially based upon the consent of the boxing world. Study with Quizlet and memorize flashcards containing terms like Robinson v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police 2014, East Suffix River Catchment Board v Kent, Reeves v Commissioner of Police and more. Obviously a full report should then be sent to the relevant Area Council or Board and the sooner this is done, from a medical view point, the better.". 55. . 293.". The claimant drank the water, and claimed damages for having consumed arsenic in it. This concludes my summary of the facts which I consider material to the question of whether the Board owed a duty of care to Mr Watson. If, which I doubt, this conclusion represents any step beyond what is already settled law, I am fully persuaded it is a proper one to take.". The comparison drawn by Mr Walker between the Board and a rescuer is not apt. 124. These cases turned upon the assumption of responsibility to an individual. This did not, however, affect the position so far as responsibility for the safety of the boxers was concerned. Ringside medical facilities were available, but did not provide immediate resuscitation. .Cited Calvert v William Hill Credit Ltd ChD 12-Mar-2008 The claimant said that the defendant bookmakers had been negligent in allowing him to continue betting when they should have known that he was acting under an addiction. 105. The fight was terminated at 22.54. 255.". Mr Watson's case can be summarised as follows: i) The Board assumed responsibility for the control of an activity the essence of which was that personal injuries should be sustained by those participating. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE Case No: QBENF1999/1137/A2, (1) BRITISH BOXING BOARD OF CONTROL LIMITED, (2) WORLD BOXING ORGANISATION INCORPORATED, (Transcript of the Handed Down Judgment of, Smith Bernal Reporting Limited, 190 Fleet Street, Tel No: 020 7421 4040, Fax No: 020 7831 8838, - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -, Mr C Mackay, QC and Mr Neil Block (instructed by Myers Fletcher & Gordon) appeared on behalf of the Respondent/Claimant. 82. Held: A certifying . The purpose of his assessment was to enable him to give expert advice to the education authority about the child. This involves intubation, or the insertion of an endotracheal tube. In Caparo v Dickman at p.617 Lord Bridge considered a series of decisions of the Privy Council and the House of Lords in relation to the duty of care in negligence and summarised their effect as follows:-. 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.