| Sports Law & Arbitration |
Case Study 1
Danny was a gymnastics coach from 2008 to 2016, specializing in the trampoline. He stopped coaching gymnastics in 2016 and is now coaching diving. He has kept his NROC license updated and has been attending coaching courses to keep abreast with the latest coaching methods. On 12 January 2019, he met his primary school classmate Jenny whom he had not seen for 20 years. Jenny had a 9-year old child, Tom, who has a keen interest in gymnastics, especially the trampoline. After a brief conversation, Jenny asked Danny if he could teach her son gymnastics, especially the techniques in jumping on the trampoline.
Danny was reluctant at first because he had not coached gymnastics for some time but Jenny insisted. She knew that Danny was an ex-national gymnast who specialized in the trampoline. Thus, she wanted her son to learn from the best. Danny finally agreed but did not accept any payment. He also warned Jenny that there were risks involved in jumping on the trampoline, such as serious injuries from landing outside the trampoline. Therefore, Tom had to listen to his instructions very carefully. Jenny told him not to worry because Tom is a disciplined child and knows how to follow instructions.
Danny then agreed to teach Tom at the trampoline park near Yishun called Trampopo, every Monday evening from 5:30 to 6.30pm. They decided to go to Trampopo because Danny could get a discount as he is a regular customer there. He could also book a personal trampoline area to coach individual classes.
The weekly trampoline lessons started in March 2019 and went well. Tom was a very active boy and quickly picked up the basic trampoline jumps and landing techniques. After 3 months, Tom asked Danny to teach him how to do a trampoline flip while in the air.
However, Danny told Tom that he should master the basic jumps and landing techniques first. He also warned him not to try to do a trampoline flip while in the air until he was more confident with his basic jumps.
One day, during one of their regular coaching sessions, Danny needed to go to the washroom, so he told Tom to take a water break and rest. At around 6:05pm, Tom got tired of waiting and wanted to try to do a trampoline flip while in the air. Thus, he went ahead to do it on his own. Tom did a trampoline flip and landed out of the trampoline area in an awkward position. He lost consciousness.
The Trampopo staff on duty, Rob, was not able to see the incident as he was attending to other customers in another area.
When Danny returned to the personal trampoline area at 6:06pm, he saw that Tom was unconscious and immediately called Rob for help. Rob saw that Tom was no longer breathing. Rob tried to administer CPR but Danny noticed that he was pressing too hard. He then took over and asked Rob to get the AED. Rob brought the AED and tried to use it. However, the AED had expired and the battery was flat.
After 2 minutes of executing CPR, Danny was able to revive Tom. Tom was brought to the hospital where he had to stay for a few days.
Tom was diagnosed to have a fractured ankle due to his awkward landing and some broken ribs due to the CPR conducted by Rob. He had extensive surgery to his ankle and the total cost of the multiple surgeries cost $150,000. Tom also stayed in the hospital for an extended period of time as his ribs took longer than expected to heal. This was because Jenny did not allow Tom to do the exercises prescribed by the therapist as it was too painful. The extended stay in hospital cost an additional $110,000.
Jenny was not happy with what had happened and wanted to sue Danny, Rob, and the management and staff of Trampopo.
Trampopo informed Jenny of a clause (refer to the box below) on the indemnity form that she had signed before Tom started his trampoline sessions every week.
“I, Jenny Pan, parent of Tom Pan, understand and assume the risks of personal injury to my child that may result from the activities by Trampopo, and am aware of the potential for injury while participating. I do hereby relieve Trampopo and their employees from all professional and general liability for personal injury.”
Answer all questions
Answers MUST provide the supporting evidence from the case study, research, and the relevant laws before arriving at the conclusion. It is not necessary to copy the questions but it is important to indicate the number of each of your answers clearly.
Q1. Jenny wants to file a police report to let the Public Prosecutor investigate if there was a criminal charge. At the same time, she also filed a civil case against Rob. Explain why it is possible to have two separate law suits for one case and identify where this civil case should be filed. (5 Marks, 200-250 words)
Q2. Discuss how you would advise Jenny in establishing the THREE elements of Negligence against Danny. Cite common law cases to support your argument. (10 Marks, 400-500 words)
Q3. Choose the TWObest defences that Danny can raise against the claim of
Negligence against him. Cite common law cases to support your argument. (10 Marks, 400-500 words)
Q4. What should Danny have done immediately after the accident to manage the situation professionally? (10 Marks, 400-500 words)
Q5. If you were the judge, what would be your decision on this case? Explain the rationale behind your decision. (5 Marks, 200-250 words)
