Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy (CTE) and the Characterisation of "Obvious Risk of Harm": Dangerous Recreational Activity, Assumption of Risk, and Other Defences.
{"title":"Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy (CTE) and the Characterisation of \"Obvious Risk of Harm\": Dangerous Recreational Activity, Assumption of Risk, and Other Defences.","authors":"David Thorpe","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>As athletes who are said to be suffering with the symptoms of Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy (CTE) move towards prosecuting their Sport Governing Body (SGB) in negligence, a critical aspect of a plaintiff's claim is how a court of law will characterise \"risk of harm\" in the form of CTE. A general, broad characterisation of CTE as a type of concussion or head trauma would operate to bring defences associated with \"obvious risk\" into operation and perhaps threaten the athlete's case irredeemably. This article argues, however, that a narrow characterisation of CTE - as a neurodegenerative disease or tauopathy - or specifically as CTE, is appropriate in law and fact. It must be accepted as a matter of logic that the \"risk of harm\" in the form of CTE is today an \"obvious risk\" to premier-level contact sport athletes, such that an athlete's claims in negligence against an SGB will, all things being equal, be defeated.</p>","PeriodicalId":45522,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Law and Medicine","volume":"31 4","pages":"751-782"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Law and Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
As athletes who are said to be suffering with the symptoms of Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy (CTE) move towards prosecuting their Sport Governing Body (SGB) in negligence, a critical aspect of a plaintiff's claim is how a court of law will characterise "risk of harm" in the form of CTE. A general, broad characterisation of CTE as a type of concussion or head trauma would operate to bring defences associated with "obvious risk" into operation and perhaps threaten the athlete's case irredeemably. This article argues, however, that a narrow characterisation of CTE - as a neurodegenerative disease or tauopathy - or specifically as CTE, is appropriate in law and fact. It must be accepted as a matter of logic that the "risk of harm" in the form of CTE is today an "obvious risk" to premier-level contact sport athletes, such that an athlete's claims in negligence against an SGB will, all things being equal, be defeated.