San Francisco Frontiers - Rugby players lose order challenge in brain injury claim

A mix of professional and amateur players claim that World Rugby, the Welsh Rugby Union (WRU), England's Rugby Football Union (RFU), the Rugby Football League and the British Amateur Rugby League Association breached a duty of care to protect them from injury.

Lawyers for the players say they have suffered a range of neurological conditions such as early onset dementia, Parkinson's, epilepsy and motor neurone disease because of repeated blows.

They argue that the governing bodies had the knowledge and resources to understand the likelihood of brain damage, but did not take steps against this or inform the players.

Each of the governing bodies denies wrongdoing and is defending the legal claims.

At a hearing last month, lawyers representing players brought appeals over case management court orders, including over the provision of medical records.

These orders, if not followed, could lead to the cases being thrown out.

In written submissions for the hearing in November, Susan Rodway, acting for the players, challenged the orders, describing one as "disproportionate and oppressive, irrational and perverse".

But in a judgement on Monday, Justice Dexter Dias dismissed the appeals.

He said in his 71-page ruling that it was "well within the generous margin of his discretion" for a previous judge to make the orders, adding: "I cannot accept that the judge's decision was unreasonable or perverse, or suffered from any of the further condemnatory adjectives the claimants have deployed at various points."

The judge later said: "There was a serious erosion of the confidence the court could safely place in the way the disclosure process had been conducted."

Rodway previously said that obtaining all the medical records for the hundreds of players is "akin to the folklore 'wicked stepmothers' who compel the princess to mow vast meadows using only nail scissors".

However, in Monday's ruling, Justice Dexter Dias said this "both misunderstands and exaggerates the task".

He continued: "Where medical evidence is unavailable or no longer in existence, the affidavit can simply explain that.

"If an extension of time is required in respect of the medical records of an individual claimant due to difficulties beyond the claimants' control, that can be justified and applied for."

Law firm Rylands Garth, representing the ex-players, said in a statement to AFP that it was grateful to the judge for providing "greater clarity regarding the required level of disclosure of claimants' medical records".

"To date, we have already disclosed hundreds of thousands of pages of documents in support of the case against World Rugby, the RFU and WRU, as well as the rugby league defendants," it said in a statement.

"Many of these documents were disclosed several years ago. The defendants have never formally responded to the claims and continue to attempt to hold up the case's progress through the court."

U.Campbell--SFF