mcmahon_dearSCS0614
SCS (i) The pursuer was officiating as a ball spotter in a golf tournament. He was struck and injured by a ball played by the defender, a competitor, and sued for damages, claiming that the defender was negligent.
(ii) I have assoilzied the defender having concluded that: (1) the defender played his shot in the ordinary course of play; (2) the danger of being struck by a ball was a risk incidental to the competition which was accepted by the pursuer when undertaking the task of officiating; and (3) the defender had not committed an error of judgment that a reasonable competitor being a reasonable man of the sporting world would not have made.
. . (v) It was contended on behalf of the defender that he owed the pursuer no duty of care . .
Held: The claim failed: ‘the defender played his second shot in the ordinary course of play. The danger of the pursuer’s being hit by that shot was a risk incidental to the competition, which was accepted by the pursuer. The injury sustained by the pursuer was not caused by an error of judgment on the part of the defender that a reasonable competitor being a reasonable man of the sporting world would not have made.’
Lord Jones
[2014] ScotCS CSOH – 100
Bailii
Scotland, Personal Injury, Negligence
Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.534128