Liability in sports and games
Is it all in the game? An increased threshold for liability applies to sports and game situations. On the one hand that makes sense; accidents often occur in sport and game situations and almost everyone sports every week.
What is important in sports and games situations is that it must first be established that such a situation actually existed, so that the participant entered a sporting situation. This can also be assumed when certain elements that are characteristic of a game situation are present. The existence of clear rules can be a good indication and it is also important to know that the victim does not have to be a participant. For example, the increased threshold of liability often applies also to ‘spectators’.
Simply violating a rule of play is not directly illegal, but it does count in the assessment of liability. However, the more serious the violation, the greater the chance of civil liability. But participants in a sport or game must, in all reasonableness, expect some dangerous, poorly coordinated, incorrectly timed or insufficiently actions or behaviours that the sport or game involves from each other. The degree of “breaking” a game rule and careless action is an important indicator.
Is there a sports and game situation in which you have been injured?
Own fault of the victim also plays often a major role (article 6:101 BW), namely when the victim has provoked the act of the other or made a wrong move himself, which results in incomplete compensation and carrying a part of the own damage. This usually occurs when riding someone else’s horse. The person has taken and accepted the risk of riding the horse of another. In that case, standard percentages of 50% are often used, and in the case of very serious injuries, a correction can lead to an increase. AVB Law therefore recommends that in the event of serious injury, where a 50% liability is maintained, to litigate about the percentage of liability to increase the compensation for the victim.
Another important question in sports and games situations is when this situation has ended and therefore when that increased threshold for liability no longer applies. This case involved ringing the bell, signifying the end of the game. After the bell rang, the victim was thrown into the water, with serious injury as a result. The Supreme Court: participants should reasonably expect, to some degree, dangerous behaviour from and from each other. The throw in the water was therefore not unlawful so there was no liability.