Another illustration is provided by Watson v British Boxing Board of Control Ltd [2001] QB 1134. The Court of Appeal concluded that the defendant, the sole controlling body regulating professional boxing, breached its duty towards the claimant, Michael Watson, who had suffered permanent brain damage while fighting Chris Eubank. The Board should have had ringside resuscitation equipment available and doctors who knew how to use it. One factor which weighed with the court was [...].
Answer
that ‘serious brain damage … represented the most serious risk posed by the sport and one that required to be addressed’
Tags
#breach #negligence #tort
Question
Another illustration is provided by Watson v British Boxing Board of Control Ltd [2001] QB 1134. The Court of Appeal concluded that the defendant, the sole controlling body regulating professional boxing, breached its duty towards the claimant, Michael Watson, who had suffered permanent brain damage while fighting Chris Eubank. The Board should have had ringside resuscitation equipment available and doctors who knew how to use it. One factor which weighed with the court was [...].
Answer
?
Tags
#breach #negligence #tort
Question
Another illustration is provided by Watson v British Boxing Board of Control Ltd [2001] QB 1134. The Court of Appeal concluded that the defendant, the sole controlling body regulating professional boxing, breached its duty towards the claimant, Michael Watson, who had suffered permanent brain damage while fighting Chris Eubank. The Board should have had ringside resuscitation equipment available and doctors who knew how to use it. One factor which weighed with the court was [...].
Answer
that ‘serious brain damage … represented the most serious risk posed by the sport and one that required to be addressed’
If you want to change selection, open original toplevel document below and click on "Move attachment"
Parent (intermediate) annotation
Open it mant, Michael Watson, who had suffered permanent brain damage while fighting Chris Eubank. The Board should have had ringside resuscitation equipment available and doctors who knew how to use it. One factor which weighed with the court was <span>that ‘serious brain damage … represented the most serious risk posed by the sport and one that required to be addressed’. <span><body><html>
Original toplevel document (pdf)
cannot see any pdfs
Summary
status
not learned
measured difficulty
37% [default]
last interval [days]
repetition number in this series
0
memorised on
scheduled repetition
scheduled repetition interval
last repetition or drill
Details
No repetitions
Discussion
Do you want to join discussion? Click here to log in or create user.