Both clubs involved were in the leamington local league. Condon v basi the master of the rolls.
The court held that the standard of care varies according to the level of.
Condon v basi. Condon v basi 2 1985 the defendant in this case broke the claimant s leg in what was described as a vicious tackle. The parties were playing football. Furthermore in condon v basi it was established and reaffirmed that participants in sports contests owe a duty to all other participants to take reasonable care not to cause them harm.
During a football match the claimant suffered a broken leg after a challenge from the defendant. It was also stated that the duty is to exercise such care as is appropriate in circumstances and this would depend on the sport being played the degree of risk associated its conventions and customs and the standard of skill and judgement reasonably to be expected of players. Both clubs were in the leamington local league.
Condon v basi 1985 1 wlr 866 court of appeal the claimant suffered a broken leg during a tackle from the defendant during a football match. It was held that the care afforded to the pursuer fell below the required standard of care and therefore the defendant was held liable. The plaintiff s leg was broken in a tackle by the defendant during a local league football match.
The existence of the duty of care as well as causation is not questioned. Condon v basi 1985 1 wlr 866 facts. It arose out of a football match played on a sunday between whittle wanderers and khalso football club.
This is an appeal from a decision of his honour judge wootton in the warwick county court given in march 1984. Transcript of the shorthand notes of the association of official shorthandwriters ltd room 392 royal courts of justice and 2 new square lincoln s inn london w c 2. The court s question was as to the standard of care expected from a football player.
The defendant s tackle was reckless and therefore he was in breach of the standard of care expected of a local league player. Condon v basi it was confirmed that a player of sports owes a duty to all the other players. On a general level it one a mere handful of appellate court decisions in the common law world to consider the liability to one another of participants in physical contact sports.
Had the defendant breached the necessary standard of care. The defendant executed a late dangerous and foul tackle on the plaintiff breaking his leg. Ca 30 apr 1985.
Secondly the case follows the decision of the high court of australia in rootes v. Condon v basi 1985 ewca civ 12 30 april 1985 royal courts of justice. The claimant was playing for whittle wanderers and the defendant for the khalso football club.
Those taking part in competitive sport still owed a duty of care to others taking part with them. Basi is worthy of note in at least three respects. The defendant was sent off and the plaintiff sued.