The Law is Not in the Business of Discouraging High-Risk Adventure Sports

Adventure sports enthusiasts have a perfect right voluntarily to place themselves in danger and, as a High Court ruling showed, the law is not in the business of discouraging organisers of challenging and high-risk events.

The case concerned a very fit middle-aged woman who took part in a…

Sep 13, 2021

Stephanie ecate qjw2pjm8tmw unsplash 1024x681

Adventure sports enthusiasts have a perfect right voluntarily to place themselves in danger and, as a High Court ruling showed, the law is not in the business of discouraging organisers of challenging and high-risk events.

The case concerned a very fit middle-aged woman who took part in a demanding obstacle race. She was swinging between monkey rings when she fell to the ground, suffering serious injuries to her right leg and shoulder. She sought compensation from the event’s organisers on the basis that they had failed in their duty under the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957 to take reasonable care for her safety.

Ruling on the case, the Court noted that, prior to the event, she signed a waiver form by which she acknowledged that her participation gave rise to a risk of serious injury, even death. She knowingly and freely accepted all such risks. However, the Court noted that, as a matter of law, the form could not exclude the organisers from liability if the accident arose from their negligence.

Dismissing her claim, however, the Court noted that the monkey ring obstacle was particularly challenging and many other participants had also fallen. She and others taking part in the event were given adequate instructions on how to embark on the obstacle. A hay landing cushion had been provided and a claim that it had not been properly spread, so as to prevent bare patches, was rejected.

The Court observed that accidents of this type are an inherent risk of participation in adventure sports events and that no amount of care and vigilance by organisers can eliminate the possibility of such risks materialising. The woman had elected to take part in the event and was well aware of the dangers involved. Although she deserved much sympathy for her grave misfortune, the fact that she landed badly and suffered serious injury was a matter of mere chance.

Adjusted Right to Work Checks Extended

The government has announced that the end date for the temporary adjusted checks has now been deferred to 5 April 2022. The following temporary changes were made on 30 March 2020 and now remain in place until 5 April 2022: checks can currently be carried out over video callsjob applicants and existing workers can send scanned documents or a photo of documents for checks using email or a mobile app, rather than sending originalsemployers should use the Home Office Employer Checking Service if a…

Right to Disconnect

Article from the Financial News - Friday August 27th 2021 When the pandemic struck, many businesses were forced to remove staff from the office and set them up at home at short notice. In the past 17 months, businesses have worked effectively with staff working from home. Productivity has increased, and staff have found that a more flexible working pattern has enabled a better work-life balance for many. Now that home schooling has become a distant memory, we hear that parents, grandparents and…

Hotel Owner Ruled Liable Following Guest’s Fatal Fall from Window

Property occupiers are obliged to take reasonable care for the safety of their visitors, but does that duty extend to those who choose to take obvious risks? The Court of Appeal addressed that issue in a guideline case concerning a hotel guest who fell out of a window to his death. The man was staying on the hotel’s second floor after attending a wedding when he fell nine metres from the sash window in the early hours of the morning. His widow sought compensation from the hotel’s owner under…