ARTICLE
29 November 2011

FORE!! - Legal Liability for Wayward Golf Shots

Mr Phee sought compensation from the court for his injury arguing that (a) the other golfer, Mr Gordon, had failed to exercise reasonable care as he had played the shot when it was unsafe to do so and (b) the golf club had not carried out a risk assessment of the course or erected warning signs.
United Kingdom Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration

You may have read recently about the Scottish court case brought by Mr Phee.   He had been playing golf at Niddry Castle Golf Club in 2007 and while walking between holes was struck by a wayward golf ball, losing his eye as a result. 

Mr Phee sought compensation from the court for his injury arguing that (a) the other golfer, Mr Gordon, had failed to exercise reasonable care as he had played the shot when it was unsafe to do so and (b) the golf club had not carried out a risk assessment of the course or erected warning signs.  

The judge found for Mr Phee.  The amount of compensation that Mr Phee would receive if his claim was successful had already been agreed. Mr Gordon was found principally liable to Mr Gordon and was ordered to pay him £280,000 (70%) and the Golf Club was also found liable to Mr Phee for £120,000 (30%).  Both parties will also be responsible for Mr Phee's court expenses.

The case is an unfortunate reminder that we owe duties of care to other people in many walks of life, including golfers relaxing on a golf course. The possibility of injuring other people on the golf course with a wayward shot is a real risk and golfers, as well as golf clubs, need to take appropriate care. They should also take out insurance to cover the potentially significant consequences of getting things wrong. 

From a legal perspective Mr Gordon's liability in the circumstances is unsurprising and it is to be hoped for all concerned that he was insured.  What is more interesting is the liability of the golf club but the case serves as a useful reminder of the need to carry out risk assessments in business and to implement the lessons learned from these assessments.  The evidence led at court helped establish that the risk of injury to Mr Phee was inherently obvious due to the design of the golf course. The layout of the holes and the footpaths running beside the course created a foreseeable risk of injury, even though there had been no reports of previous incidents or accidents, leading the court to find that the golf club should have taken a more proactive approach in terms of its risk assessment and warned golfers of the potential danger by way of posters and signs. 

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See More Popular Content From

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More