Rugby player paralysed after ‘reckless’ tackle wins case against opposing player
Story by Matthew Weaver and PA Media • 4h ago
Arugby player who was paralysed from the waist down after a “reckless” tackle has won her high court claim against the opposing player who made the “red mist” challenge.
In October 2017, Dani Czernuszka suffered a spinal fracture during an amateur league rugby match that has since left her having to use a wheelchair.
Czernuszka, who was 28 at the time, brought legal action against Natasha King, whom she claimed had dangerously tackled her during the game and was responsible for her injuries.
On Thursday, Mr Justice Spencer ruled in Czernuszka’s favour, finding that King was liable for the unintentional injuries she had caused.
The judge found that during the match between Rams RFC and Bracknell RFC, King “launched herself” at Czernuszka when the latter player was bent over waiting to receive the ball.
“She drove the claimant backwards and, importantly, downwards using her full weight and strength to crush the claimant in a manoeuvre which was obviously dangerous and liable to cause injury,” the judge said,.
After a trial at the high court, Spencer found King and other members of the Bracknell team had played “in an inappropriately aggressive and intimidatory manner” and that she had become “increasingly frustrated” as the game progressed.
He also said King had been “looking for an opportunity to get her revenge on the claimant”.
“The red mist had metaphorically descended over the defendant’s eyes,” he said, adding that King had wound herself up during a previous attempt to tackle Czernuszka.
The judge said: “Although this was a league match, the nature of the league being developmental meant that the players were still learning the game and it should have been played in that spirit: the players had a duty to be mindful of each other and to play with the understanding that enjoyment and learning were the main objectives, not winning.”
Spencer said whether Czernuszka had the ball at the time of the tackle was “irrelevant” to King. He said: “At that moment she was not attempting to play within the laws of the game, but to exact retribution on the claimant.”
He concluded: “I do not find that the defendant intended to injure the claimant, indeed that is not alleged against her.
“I do find, though, that the ‘tackle’ was executed with reckless disregard for the claimant’s safety in a manner which was liable to cause injury and that the defendant was so angry by this time that she closed her eyes to the risk to which she was subjecting the claimant.”
After the judgment, Czernuszka said: “I am grateful for today’s ruling and to finally put to bed all of the untruths and fabrications surrounding what happened during the game that day.
“Learning to live with my life-changing injuries has been difficult and something I could not have done without the support of my family and close friends.
“Sport has always given me great pleasure in life, and I don’t blame the game of rugby for what happened that day. Ultimately, I feel I was let down by improper and poor behaviour from the opposing player, coaching staff and the referee.”
https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/uknew...168c258bddd26b
