The SS Coaches Association Series: Brodie from Legal, Part 1

[Brodie Butland]

This is so, though it's mitigated by the legislative and case law understanding that some things are inherently risky. Of course then we're relying on the judge's understanding of physical activity. Your Honour, do you even lift, bro?

Sounds a bit like the doctrine of primary assumption of risk in the States...which I didn't cover in the SSCAC presentation but did in my April article. And I agree...I don't like primary assumption of risk because it really does depend on your judge. There was a terrific opinion out of a California appeals court where the judges tossed a suit where a guy had a heart attack from being over worked...I suspect that the authoring judge had some athletic background given the language he used in the case. But for every three good primary assumption of risk cases, there's a really bad one.

The case law in Australia is sparse - few get sued, and most of those settle out of court - and inconsistent. This is why I have insurance, it covers me even in cases of (supposed) negligence as to duty of care. It's only $110 a year for millions in cover, which shows what the insurance companies think are the chances of my being sued.

And for this reason, I would always suggest that anyone who does any reasonable amount of coaching get insurance, and have an airtight waiver to boot (assuming your state/country allows it).

[Jonathon Sullivan]

This was a terrific lecture. Great content for our conference and our coaches.

[lewabbit]

When do we change his forum title to "Consigliere"?

Ha! Simma wins the internet today, with that one.

[Steve Hill]

This was a terrific lecture. Great content for our conference and our coaches.

This lecture is good for ANYONE who coaches.

[Gunnhild Bruno]

Ha! Simma wins the internet today, with that one.

I'm pretty sure someone (Michele K?) had suggested this title for Tom Campitelli back when the SSCA was in its infancy, but it's much more applicable to Brodie.

[Lamneth]

Very interesting, and very much looking forward to part II.

Brodie, does the waiver / assumption of risk depend on the relationship being professional? For example, should someone allowing friends to use his garage gym at no charge make them sign one? How about if they are chipping money in for equipment? If you are coaching someone as a favor (no charge), either in your personal gym, or at someone else's gym?