Rugby Accident Claim in French Courts
IT’S no wonder that the game of rugby suffered a sharp intake of breath when the judgment in the Aurelien Rougerie v Phil Greening case was handed down by a French civil court on Thursday. Greening, the former Wasps hooker, was found guilty of causing injury to Rougerie’s throat during a club match in August 2002. The French wing was hospitalised for 12 weeks, was forced to eat through a straw, underwent three operations on his windpipe and missed out on some big games for his club, Montferrand (now Clermont Auvergne) and also for France.
The international wing sued Greening for loss of earnings and personal injuries. Rougerie was looking for a euro equivalent of around £65,000 in damages but was awarded just under £29,000. In many ways, the money is incidental, however. It’s the precedent that was the talk of rugby.
How can an incident that was deemed a legitimate play by the match officials, who did not give a foul, not to mind issue a yellow card, be interpreted otherwise by a civil court? And now that one case has been successfully brought to court by a French player will there be others? Next time there is a bad injury in France (say, in the Heineken Cup or the Six Nations) and a player from these islands is implicated, will we be heading for the bar (as in legal) as opposed to the bar (as in lager) to sort it all out?
As Wasps’ coach, Shaun Edwards, said on Friday: “It worries me. We live in a blame culture where ambulance chasing makes a lot of people a good living.” We’ll get around to all that in a minute. But first, to the day in question. Montferrand were hosting Wasps in Clermont-Ferrand. The game was in the first minute when Greening took the ball up and attempted to get rid of a tackler (Rougerie) by handing him off.
Play went on. No punishment was administered by the referee. The first Greening knew about the controversy was long after the final whistle when he was informed that Rougerie was in a bad way and that his hand-off (Montferrand said he used his elbow not his hand) was the cause.
That much was in dispute right from the off but what was self-evident was that Rougerie was in huge discomfort, however it happened. He spent three months in hospital and had three operations on his larynx. The wheels of justice started to turn. A personal damages claim was filed against Greening. Rougerie’s people laid it on the line. “There is a price for the pain, a price for the scar on Aurelien’s neck and a price for lost earnings,” said Jean-Paul Brousse, his lawyer.
“I have looked at the tape many times,” Greening responded, “and I am satisfied that I did nothing wrong. So is the club. It’s quite scary that these things can happen. You don’t know where it’s going to lead.”
Eventually it was to lead to a civil court and a verdict given against Greening. There has been much talk of precedents ever since. Damian Hopley, the chief executive of the Professional Rugby Players’ Association said: “This is very shocking for the game. It sets a very dangerous precedent in a full contact sport. Because of that there is bound to be widespread concern at this ruling. Having seen the incident, it was a very straightforward case of a hand-off.”
Tony Copsey, chief executive of Greening’s old club Wasps, echoed Copley’s concerns. “We do not know the full implications for the sport but this would appear to set a dangerous precedent.”
It’s worth pointing out that, in all probability, a British court would not have come to a similar decision as their French counterparts. I don’t claim to know the ins and outs of French law but hereabouts it is plain enough. If a player wants to do a Rougerie and sue another player for this kind of incident he has two options. He can claim assault or he can go for negligence.
To stand up a charge of assault you must prove intent. That’s not an easy road to go down. Negligence is the alternative. To be successful you must show that the Greening figure didn’t take reasonable care in the incident. Deciding on what is reasonable is the legal equivalent of arguing about the length of a piece of string.
Rugby players are deemed to accept a degree of risk of injury every time they run on to the field. That is the nature of the sport. In Britain, if a player doesn’t commit an act of foul play in the eyes of the referee then the chances of him being found guilty in one of our courts would be slim.
In France, that is not the case, not after this ruling.
Now all of this may prove to be a one-off. There may not be another Rougerie out there. But the possibility of a repeat has got people talking. For example, take Nathan Hines or Simon Taylor, both making their living with top French teams, both expected to push the laws of the game to the absolute limit in their weekly battles with big, bruising packs in the First Division.
Players get injured all the time. What about a hypothetical scenario that sees Hines or Taylor involved in a hefty tackle that puts an opponent in hospital. If the tackle isn’t totally legit he is now vulnerable to a damages claim. If it’s on the high side or a little late, he could be in serious trouble, depending on what kind of customer he’s dealing with.
The scrum is even trickier. A scrum goes down and a front-row forward damages his neck and is forced out of the game because of some borderline offence by an opposing prop. How are we fixed in that scenario? What’s the compensation for a career-ending injury? Six figures and up, no question.
The French-based Scots have to live with this every week, the rest will only encounter this potential legal minefield on the few occasions a year they play in France. Rougerie’s brilliance on the wing has often inspired awe but last week he found another way to drop our jaws. Meanwhile, rugby is still thinking this one through, hoping against hope that when Rougerie became the first player to win an award like this, he also became the last.
Sorry, Gordon, nothing to brag about in this tournament
TRULY these are desperate times for our Prime Minister. Gordon Brown dithered on the calling of an election, was accused of plagiarism on inheritance tax, was embarrassed by the Northern Rock fiasco and is currently looking like a drowning man on the saga of the lost child benefits discs.
And now he’s on to another loser with his support for the return of the Home Internationals.
These championships were given a decent burial many years ago and nothing can put flesh on the bones at this stage. All these campaigns calling for an exhumation ignore the fact that the one fixture of any appeal, Scotland v England, has relevance these days only when there’s a prize at stake, like qualification for a major championship.
Anything else is just faking it. Somebody mentioned bragging rights last week. Frankly, that’s what worries me. Bragging about beating England in a puffed-up friendly while Europe’s elite are in Austria and Switzerland playing for real? Quite honestly, it would be pitiful.