Hi Everyone,

With the London Marathon happening this weekend I thought it might be an appropriate time to ask this question.

My charity client organises fun runs and similar events that the public attend to raise funds on their behalf. My client is concerned about the health of individuals and their liability if they suffer a negative health event. Currently they ask all attendees to sign a disclaimer stating that as a far as they know they are in good health. We know that a disclaimer is a weak control measure, can anyone else think of other more robust controls that can be introduced please?

Thanks in advance

DHM

The recent news of Emma Willis is a prime example of how people presume they are in good health whilst having unknown underlying health conditions.

The only way to be absolutely sure is a thorough intrusive medical examination problem is who pays the not insignifocant cost and what happens when?

Fund raising already has costs before the public throw themselves in harms way - I found myself smiling at the news those intrepid tandem parachute jumpers typically end up costing the cause more than they raise.

Best way to avoid the liability just ask for the cash.

What you've described is broadly what happens for most running events across the UK already - self assessment of health.

By way of comparison the fitness industry used to use a PAR-Q process when customers wished to start using their facilities - a 1to1 process with some base level assessment of physical health with medical professional 'permission' sought where contra-indications existed. Like an MOT though, this is merely appropriate for that point in time. Arguably may be of more practical use for one-off events but still very resource intensive. Consequently this process has often now given way in favour of the Health Commitment Statement which is pretty much what you're describing - a disclaimer that I suspect many people sign without significant thought.

At some point, particularly in leisure activities, there comes a degree of personal responsibility. As an event organiser you can foresee that there will be various accidents and an increased likelihood of medical incidents and plan your emergency arrangements accordingly. With those response arrangements in place I would have thought that the duty of care was met...but I haven't got any claims data to back that up! I can certainly attest that would be my regulatory view.

The people taking part in these sort of events are volunteers and as such they are responsible for their understanding what effect taking part will have on their own health. I don’t like the term “disclaimer” as it implies that the organisers have a duty of care to the entrants, but the entrants  have agreed to waive that duty. There is no duty of care as far as individual’s health goes. All they might get is a reminder of this fact. I am not sure they even need to sign it.

Just because someone comes to harm it does not automatically follow that  someone is at fault and liable.

Of course if the person injured is a bystander and not volunteering for anything, then that is a completely different kettle of fish.