A Giant Awakens

The rise of american rugby

“I got a pommel in my eye. A pommel is the end of a sword – not the sharp end, the other end. It wasn’t actually a sword fight. I was rugby tackling somebody but we hadn’t rehearsed with all the kit on so suddenly there’s a whole other part of the equation and that did really hurt.”

– Tom Burke

Upcoming Events



Become a fan and check for updates on the Facebook fan page and send us some fans, drop email & link us to your club/team webpage, wherever you are in the world, we’ll add a link on our site !

Thanks for visiting this page and supporting the growth of rugby in the US !

News Blog

Trauma Litigation in Rugby-- Part I: Task of Care

In December 2020, lawsuit was instigated by a team of previous expert rugby gamers against the Rugby Football Union (” RFU”), the Welsh Rugby Union (” WRU”) and also Globe Rugby, the sporting activity’s International Federation.

A pre-action letter of claim was reportedly sent on part of nine gamers, consisting of former England internationals Steve Thompson as well as Michael Lipman, and former Wales flanker, Alix Popham. The gamers are saying that the regulating bodies failed to effectively secure them from the risks related to blast, which has resulted in eight of the 9 players being identified with early-onset dementia and possible chronic terrible encephalopathy (CTE).

This collection of write-ups will certainly evaluate the lawsuits carefully, considering each of the crucial lawful problems that are likely to arise. For the evasion of question, this author has no direct knowledge of the procedures and, as such, will prevent guessing as to the accurate truths.

Given that the players so far involved in the lawsuits played the majority of their rugby in England or Wales, it shall be presumed the legislation of England as well as Wales will be applicable to the dispute, which the English courts will certainly have jurisdiction.

The players’ insurance claims will be brought in the tort of oversight. For any oversight case, a claimant much show that the defendant owed them an obligation of care; breached that duty of treatment; and also that this breach of task triggered the claimant to suffer loss. If successful, the complainant will certainly recuperate problems for their losses, though there are various protections that might be offered to a defendant.

This collection will extensively follow that structure. Part I will certainly think about whether rugby’s governing bodies owed the players an obligation of care, Part II will ask whether they may have breached that responsibility, while Part III will analyze the issues of causation. Part IV will certainly then take into consideration the feasible supports the regulating bodies may have, Component V will certainly explain just how problems would be determined, and Part VI will certainly talk about the team litigation element, feasible jurisdictional difficulties, as well as the possibilities of negotiation.

A last initial point worth making is that this legal action will not always coincide as the NFL concussion lawsuits. Though there will certainly be similarities, numerous problems are most likely to be unique, which will be highlighted throughout this series. Significantly, the NFL never officially admitted liability, and the case resolved without a test. The NFL and rugy have different rules but play on very similar fields that are well maintained by landscapers in Auburn. This making the sport very similar and just as dangerous.

2. The obligation of care in English law
In English legislation, identifying when an obligation of treatment will emerge is not constantly simple. Various legal tests have created over the years, determining a variety of pertinent elements however there is no “general concept efficient in giving a practical test suitable in every situation”. 
Following the current decision of the UK Supreme Court in Darnley v Croydon NHS Depend on, a task of treatment will certainly exist in two situations. Initially, and un-controversially, there will be a task of care where one has actually currently been acknowledged because particular context (simply put, where there is an existing precedent).
Second, in “unique scenarios”, there will be a responsibility of care where it would certainly be reasonable, simply, and practical to impose such an obligation; damages is reasonably direct; and there is a sufficiently proximate partnership in between the events– in other words, on application of the Caparo aspects. In this 2nd group, the courts will certainly take into consideration whether a task of care must be extended to such a scenario “on an incremental basis, approving or turning down an obligation of care in unique scenarios by analogy with recognized categories”. This test will certainly also be made use of to determine the scope of the responsibility of care.

If such a duty exists, the event who owes the duty will be under an obligation to take practical care in regard of those to whom it is owed. As concerns what is “sensible”, see Component II.

3. Duties of care in sport
The presence of a responsibility of treatment, or perhaps a lot more notably its extent, is an essential component of the rugby trauma lawsuits. Without an obligation of care, there can be no insurance claim.

Currently, it seems that the insurance claims will be brought versus the RFU and also the WRU (the “Unions”), and also World Rugby– all governing bodies. It is direct, also, that clubs (as well as probably leagues) may yet become included. What, after that, is the legal position in regard of these entities?

3.1 The Administrations
The leading English situation as regards the duty owed by sports governing bodies is Watson v British Board of Boxing Control.  Because case, Michael Watson brought a case in negligence after being drastically wounded in a fight against Chris Eubank. He suggested (successfully) that there was an absence of appropriate ringside medical centers and that this caused his significant mental retardation, which had been preventable.

Crucially, for present functions, the Court of Charm held that the BBBoC owed Watson an obligation of treatment– although that it was not the organiser of the battle. The court found that since the BBBoC put down minimal mandatory needs (which had actually been adhered to by the marketers), there was an adequately proximate relationship as well as hence a duty to take practical like ensure that accidents are effectively dealt with. The required requirements themselves were inadequate.

Lord Phillips MR attracted a difference in between “making Policies as well as providing guidance”, emphasising that by developing mandatory rules in connection to the arrangement of ringside clinical therapy, there was a closeness in between the events. He even more kept in mind that this was so because the BBBoC had medical expertise readily available to it, and also “held itself out as dealing with the safety of boxers as of paramount value”. Further, fighters might not themselves be anticipated to know what were reasonable actions to take, such that Mr Watson was reasonably qualified to trust the know-how of the BBBoC for his correct clinical treatment– a further indication of closeness. Most of these factors were likewise relevant to the bigger concern of whether it was reasonable, just and also reasonable for a task of like be imposed. The BBBoC managed every facet of the sporting activity (consisting of medical centers), it assumed duty for the criteria of healthcare, as well as it was a stated object of the BBBoC to take care of its members’ physical safety. With damages being fairly obviously sensibly near, the BBBoC was discovered to owe a responsibility of care.

So, does this choice imply that an obligation of care is currently established for rugby’s controlling bodies, or are we in a “novel” situation? In his judgment, Lord Phillips MR explained that he was not “formulating a principle of basic policy” however, the instance is certainly rather comparable. It seems to this author that the rugby lawsuits will certainly require a tiny “incremental” expansion of the task of like rugby’s governing bodies.

A giant awakens

“A Giant Awakens” is a 60 minute HD sports documentary that explores 130 years of rugby in America. Through the lens of award winning filmmaker Sylvain Doreau, the essence, spirit, and challenges of American rugby are captured at all levels from youth to the USA Men’s National Team. This documentary takes you on a journey from Olympic glory in the 1920’s, through the Rugby World Cups, and into the new Olympic opportunity in 2016.