Concussion Case Started

[Neils]

World Cup-winner Steve Thompson among 169 ex-players in concussion lawsuit against rugby authorities

High Court hears accusation of ?abject failure? by World Rugby and English and Welsh unions in the management of concussion protocols
By Daniel Schofield, Deputy Rugby Union Correspondent 23 June 2023 ? 5:49pm


A lawsuit representing 169 former professional players accused rugby union authorities in the High Court on Friday of an ?abject failure? in the sport?s management of concussion protocols.

Several of the players involved, including 2003 World Cup winner-Steve Thompson, are suffering symptoms of early-onset dementia which they believe was caused by sustaining concussions during their rugby career.

Similar legal action in the United States resulted in the NFL paying out more than ?665 million to its former players.

Two and a half years after the likes of Thompson first publicised their condition ? he revealed he cannot remember playing in the 2003 World Cup final ? the first court submissions were heard in a case management hearing brought against World Rugby, the Rugby Football Union and the Welsh Rugby Union, who deny the charges.

They have previously stated that they are ?driven by a passion to safeguard our players? and have followed the science.

The initial arguments, in Court 76 of the Royal Courts of Justice, were centred upon disclosure, the exchange of requested documents.

Susan Rodway KC, the barrister representing the players, had likened requesting historical safety records to an ?uphill battle to draw blood from the stone?.

Meanwhile, World Rugby and the English and Welsh unions have yet to receive a single medical record from the defendants despite a claim that all 169 players have shown evidence of brain damage.


In their skeleton argument, the claimants condemned the refusal by rugby?s authorities to release their historical concussion protocols and safety records. A statement read: ?The claimants suspect, therefore, that this is a case where there has been an abject failure of documenting or recording systems, protocols, reviews, health records, playing records, or commissioned medical and scientific research to support any decision by the governing bodies that related to the priority of players? safety.

?The obfuscation relied upon by the defendants in respect of disclosure leads inexorably to the reasonable suspicion that there is nothing to disclose and that the game of rugby union has been a gladiatorial contest with the focus on a purely reactive attitude to issues of health and safety.?

However, the claimants? request for full disclosure was dismissed by Judge Fontaine, on account that it was too wide-ranging, encompassing documents across several decades. Instead World Rugby must release the historical evolution of Regulation 10, relating to concussion management, by 13 October, by which time the claimants must submit ?thumbnails? or snapshots of all its players? medical records.

Rylands Garth, representing the players, has indicated that it then intends to make an application for a Group Litigation Order against rugby?s authorities, which it will bundle together with a claim by 66 amateur players which it has yet to serve.

Rylands has also requested anonymity for 150 of the 169 professional players on account of ?suicidal tendencies? associated with brain injuries. They also suggested their clients might be ostracised in small communities where rugby union is seen as the ?holy grail?. The request for anonymity has been adjourned.

A further preliminary hearing is likely to occur towards the end of this year when a decision will be made upon the anonymity as well as costs.

Rylands has also indicated that separate lawsuits for former rugby league and football players will also be launched with the rugby union case ?leading the way procedurally.?

[Neils]

Rugby union players? legal case over brain injuries begins in high court

    169 former professional and 66 ex-amateurs involved
    Players taking action against RFU, WRU and World Rugby

PA Media
Fri 23 Jun 2023 18.34 BST
Last modified on Fri 23 Jun 2023 20.22 BST

A legal claim brought by more than 200 former rugby union players against three of the sport?s governing bodies alleging they suffered brain injuries during their careers has reached the high court in London.

On Friday, lawyers representing 169 former professional and 66 ex-amateur sportsmen and women appeared in court for the first preliminary hearing in their claims against World Rugby, the Rugby Football Union and the Welsh Rugby Union.

Lawyers for the group of players have previously alleged the governing bodies failed to take reasonable steps to protect players from injury caused by repetitive blows and that many now have permanent neurological injuries including early onset dementia, Parkinson?s disease and the neurodegenerative condition chronic traumatic encephalopathy.
Latest lawsuit shows brain injuries are factor at all levels of rugby


Players who have previously spoken publicly about having these conditions include the England 2003 World Cup winner Steve Thompson and the former Wales international Dafydd James, both of whom are bringing legal action.

Thompson, who has been diagnosed with early-onset dementia, has previously said he cannot remember being awarded an MBE by the late queen after England?s victory over Australia in the World Cup final.

Susan Rodway KC, for the group of players, asked the court to order the disclosure of documents about the steps the governing bodies were taking or considering related to ?protecting the brain health of their players?, but was unsuccessful in the attempt.

The barrister said in written submissions: ?The claimants suspect, therefore, that this is a case where there has been an abject failure of documenting or recording systems, protocols, reviews, health records, playing records, or commissioned medical and scientific research to support any decision by the governing bodies that related to the priority of players? safety.

?The obfuscation relied upon by the defendants in respect of disclosure leads inexorably to the reasonable suspicion that there is nothing to disclose and that the game of rugby union has been a gladiatorial contest with the focus on a purely reactive attitude to issues of health and safety.?

Friday?s request for documents was opposed by lawyers for the three rugby union governing bodies. Michael Kent KC, for the RFU, said: ?This is not a jurisdiction that should be referred to just because it would be nice to have a fuller set of documents ? it requires some special circumstances.?

The barrister also said the request was too early in the proceedings, describing it as ?a very wide-ranging and expensive exercise?.

?There are blanket allegations against the defendants, all three defendants,? he added.


Neil Block KC, for the WRU, added: ?We are acutely aware of our obligations to the court with regards to disclosure but we also have the welfare of the players as a primary consideration.?

In written submissions, Kent, Block and World Rugby?s barrister, Nina Goolamali KC, said there were ?obvious problems apparent from the case? and that it was based on ?reducing but not eliminating the risks inherent in a contact sport such as rugby union?.

Judge Barbara Fontaine dismissed the bid for the documents, with the exception of a set of concussion management regulations from World Rugby.