‘Legitimate Sport’ or Criminal Assault? What are the Roles of the Rules and the Rule-Makers in Determining Criminal Liability for Violence on the Sports Field?

Livings, Ben

doi:10.1350/jcla.2006.70.6.495

Cited by 5 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The law of consent relating to injury causing contacts in sport has been the subject of intense academic debate in recent years (Anderson, 2005(Anderson, , 2008James, 2002James, , 2010Gardiner, 2007;Pendlebury, 2006;Livings, 2006;Fafinski 2005). These debates were fuelled by the House of Lords' obiter statements in R v Brown [1993] 2 WLR 556 that sports are the exception to the general rule that you cannot consent to having harm inflicted on your person.…”

Section: Consentmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Regulation of on-the-ball Offences: Challenges in Court

Pendlebury

2016

Entertainment and Sports Law Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Following the Court of Appeal's judgment in R v Barnes it was argued that on-the-ball contacts in sport, in breach of the rules of the game, were unlikely to be classed as criminal. It was perceived that these types of injury-causing acts were not sufficiently grave to warrant criminality and were better regulated internally or by the civil law. However, the imprisonment of amateur footballer Mark Chapman, for an injury-causing tackle, has challenged this viewpoint. This paper will explore the incident in Chapman in the light of Barnes, and argues, that the boundaries of criminality in contact sports are increasingly difficult to ascertain. It will revisit case law concerning incidents of on-the-ball offences and assess whether the prosecution and subsequent guilty plea in Chapman could have been an anticipated outcome.Internal disciplinary mechanisms will be scrutinised to whether they can impact on the criminal law's involvement.Finally the paper will put forward that the amateur status of the participant may have been a key factor in the resulting finding of criminality.

show abstract

Section: Consentmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Regulation of on-the-ball Offences: Challenges in Court

Pendlebury

2016

Entertainment and Sports Law Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…BBC: Italy I -0 Australia at http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/sporti/hi/football/world_cup _2006 /4991534.stm (accessed 8 September 2008.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Liability of Referees: An Analysis of Tort Liability for Wrong Referee Decisions

Koch¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

<p>In an increasing professional sports world, the referees in key tournaments and games have huge responsibility. Their decisions can impact not only on the game but on all the commercial interests involved in that game. This raises the issue of the liability of referees according to tort law. The main problems of liability of referees are the circumstances they work in. They have often only a split-second to make important decisions in the course of a game. The responsibility of a referee is so high that they can determine if a team wins or loses. These decisions can impact on the outcome of a game and consequently affect the financial situation of the clubs, sponsors and sportspeople. If a team is eliminated from a tournament they lose a huge amount of money. There are two legal aspects to consider. One is intention, where a referee might get involved in deliberate match-fixing, and another is negligence. Are match officials liable for their malpractice? Often a referee is not liable for lost chances because there is no causality that the team lost the game only because of a wrong referee decisions. For want of evidence the referee is in most cases not liable. However, is this right? The main thesis of this paper is that there is a liability of referees who act with intention. Referees who influence results negligently should be covered by immunity. However, sports governing body as guardians of the rules of the game should have some liability. They have a usual duty to ensure that a referee is able to manage the game and have it under control. Sports governing bodies may have vicarious liability for referee decisions as they use referees to fulfil their obligations of organising and running tournaments. The business approach of modern professional sport has added to the duties of sports governing bodies. Hence sports governing bodies have an added responsibility to ensure that all resources to support the referee and the rules - such as technical or assistant support - are utilized. These special duties need to be followed and can make sports governing bodies liable.</p>

show abstract

Current Status, Causes and Intervention Strategies of Soccer Violence in Chinese Professional Football League

Shi

Jun-mei

2008

2008 IEEE International Symposium on Knowledge Acquisition and Modeling Workshop

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

‘Legitimate Sport’ or Criminal Assault? What are the Roles of the Rules and the Rule-Makers in Determining Criminal Liability for Violence on the Sports Field?

Cited by 5 publications

References 4 publications

The Regulation of on-the-ball Offences: Challenges in Court

The Regulation of on-the-ball Offences: Challenges in Court

Liability of Referees: An Analysis of Tort Liability for Wrong Referee Decisions

Current Status, Causes and Intervention Strategies of Soccer Violence in Chinese Professional Football League

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About