Vowles v Evans

Vowles v Evans

A rugby referee, even at amateur level, owes a duty of care to players to enforce the rules designed to protect their safety. The referee breached this duty by failing to ensure only suitably trained/experienced players played in the front row, and this breach caused the claimant's injury. The threshold for liability is high, but was met on these facts.

Parties
Respondent: Richard Vowles; First Appellant: David Evans; Second Appellant: The Welsh Rugby Union Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 March 2003
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Negligence, Duty of Care, Vicarious Liability, Standard of Care, Causation, Personal Injury
Tort Law Sports Law Negligence Duty of Care Vicarious Liability Standard of Care Causation Personal Injury

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Richard Vowles

Respondent

David Evans

First Appellant

The Welsh Rugby Union Limited

Second Appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an amateur rugby referee owes a duty of care to players
  2. 2 Whether the referee breached that duty by failing to enforce safety rules
  3. 3 Whether the breach caused the claimant's injury

Ratio Decidendi

A rugby referee, even at amateur level, owes a duty of care to players to enforce the rules designed to protect their safety. The referee breached this duty by failing to ensure only suitably trained/experienced players played in the front row, and this breach caused the claimant's injury. The threshold for liability is high, but was met on these facts.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appellants to pay respondent’s costs on the standard basis, subject to detailed assessment if not agreed.
  • Detailed assessment of respondent’s costs pursuant to the Legal Aid Act 1998.