Assumption of Risk and Consent Doctrine in Sport

• Authors: Azadeh Mohamadinejad , Hamidreza Mirsafian , Andras Nemes , Mohammad Soltanhoseini
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

Everybody who illegally harms another not only must recover the injured person, but also, may be committed a crime and be punished. According to this doctrine, every time that a participant in a sport activity touches a fellow player, or consciously runs the risk that an opponent may be touched during the game, an offence is committed and he or she is liable. This is clearly an unacceptable situation. If this were the usual way a participant in violence was dealt with by the courts, nobody would play sport, as the risk of conviction would be too great. Sport would be unable to continue in the form that we presently know it. On the other hand, sports often have inherent risks that cannot be eliminated without destroying the very essence of the activity. Consent and assumption of risk defenses in sport accident cases significantly affect resolving the conflict between performing sport as a useful and beneficial activity versus a dangerous practice, and prevent liability from being imposed for just participation in sport activity. Thus, discussion about these defenses can help athletes be more aware of their rights.

Keywords

EN

defense; inherent risk; liability; damage; athlete

• Publisher: De Gruyter Open
• Journal: Physical Culture and Sport. Studies and Research
• Year: 2012
• Volume: 55
• Issue: 1
• Pages: 30-38

Dates

received

accepted

online

31 - 10 - 2012

Contributors

author

Azadeh Mohamadinejad

• Semmelweis University Faculty of Sport and Physical Education Sciences (TF) 1123 Alkotás u. 44. Budapest, Hungary

author

Hamidreza Mirsafian

• Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary
• University of Isfahan, Iran

author

Andras Nemes

• Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary

author

Mohammad Soltanhoseini

• University of Isfahan, Iran

References

• Aghainia, H. (2009). Fundamentals of Sport Law: Civil Liability In Sport [In Persian]. Tehran. DADGOSTAR Publisher.
• Beloff, H., Kerr, T., Demetriou, M. (1999). Sports Law. Hart Publishing.
• Bernardi, R. (2009). Leisure, Sport, and Assumption of Risk. Retrieved from www.bicyclelaw.com
• Citron, J., Ableman, M. (2003). Civil Liability in the Arena of Professional Sports. Retrieved from www.goodmans.ca
• Cotten, M., Cotton, D. (2002). Legal Aspects of Waivers in Sport, Recreation and Fitness Activities. PRC Publishing Inc.
• Clarke, C. (2000). Law and Order on the Courts: Application of Criminal Liability for Intentional Fouls During Sporting Events. Law Journal, 1151.
• Drago, A., (1995). Assumption of Risk in the Arena, on the Field and in the Mosh Pit: What Protection Does it Afford. Entertainment and Sports Lawyer, 13, 3-8.
• Drago, A. (2002). Assumption of Risk: An Age-old Defense Still Viable in Sports & Recreation Cases. FordhamIntellectual Property, Media & Entertainment Law Journal, 3, 12(2), 582-608.
• Duff, A. (1994). Civil Actions and Sporting Injuries Sustained by Professional Footballers. Scotts Law Times, 177.
• Fast, K. (2004). Sport liability law a guide for amateur sports organizations and their insurers. Dolden Wallace Folick LLP.
• Healey, D. (2005). Sport And The Law, 3rd ed. University of New South Wales Press Ltd.
• Hess, L. (2002). Sports And The Assumption of Risk Doctrine in New York. St. John’s Law Review, 76, 457-781.
• Jacobs, D. (2010). What is the Assumption of Risk Doctrine. Retrieved from Portland Personal Injury Law Blog.
• Jonhnson, M., Easter, B. (2007). Legal Liability for Cheerleading Injuries: Implications for Universities and Coaches. Journal of Legal Aspect of Sport, 17, 213-252.
• Keeton, W. P. Keeton, R. F. (1977). Torts: cases and materials. 2nd ed. St. Paul: West Publishing Co.
• Klar, L. (1996). Tort Law. 2nd ed. Scarborough, Ont: Carswell.
• Linden, A. (2001). Canadian Tort Law. 7th ed. (pp. 42-43). Markham Ont.: Butterworths.
• Mandell, J., Dozis, D. (2010). Primary Assumption of the Risk: Still Viable Defense, With Limitations. New York LawJournal, 244, 85.
• Prosser, W., Wade, J. (1971). Cases and Materials on Torts. 5th ed. West Law.
• Saathi, B. (2008). Consent in criminal law. Retrieved from www.shvoong.com
• Schot, N. (2005). Negligent liability in Sport. Sports Law eJournal, ePublications@bond
• Sparc. (2011). Liability of Sport and Recreation Organisations in New Zealand. Retrieved from www.sparc.org.nz
• Spengler, J., Connaughton, A. (2003). A Quantitative Approach to Assessing Legal Outcomes in Reported Sport and Recreation Negligence Cases Involving Assumption of Risk. Entertainment Law, 2, 112-129.
• Trupia, V. (2010). Lake George Central School District. Court of Appeals of New York. Retrieved from www.leagae.com.
• Uberstine, A. (1997). Law of Professional and Amateur Sports. Retrieved from http://law.widener.edu/lawlibrary.aspx
• Wong, G. (2010). Essential of Sports Law. 4th ed. Westport, Connecticut: ABC-CLIO Publishers.
• Woska, W. (1991). Negligent Employment Practices. Labor Law Journal, 16, 602-610.
• Yeo, S., (2001). Accepted Inherent Risks Among Sporting Participants. Tort Law Review, 118 & 128.

Identifiers

DOI

10.2478/v10141-012-0012-5