An important implication of this judgment is that claimants who have sustained injuries while motor racing will have difficulty in pursuing successful claims for negligence, if the safety measures taken at the circuit are endorsed by the sport's governing authorities, such as the RAC Motor Sports Association. The case illustrates how the principles concerning remoteness of damage may lead to defendants escaping liability for unexpected accidents. The judgment is also an important precedent on the standard of care owed by television production companies to competitors in a televised event.
As a result of this judgment, in future, circuits may escape liability for unexpected accidents, that arise despite safety measures being taken that are endorsed by the sport's governing bodies. But circuits may be held liable for accidents that are "reasonably foreseeable", such as those caused when someone runs over a camera (close to the edge of the track) that becomes airborne and hits another competitor It remains to be seen whether cameras will still be placed close to the edge of the track, in future.
This motorsport update has been kindly provided by Clyde & Co - click here to read the full legal update.
