Reckless play in a ‘beer league’ game can come with a cost

By LegalMatters Staff • A $700,000 judgment against a recreational league hockey player for a hit against an opponent is a warning to others who “carry themselves in a negligent manner,” says Ontario trial lawyer and safety advocate Patrick Brown.

“If you are going to act recklessly on the ice and hit people when you shouldn’t, then you are going to expose yourself to a lawsuit,” says Brown, principal partner with McLeish Orlando LLP.

In her decision released in January, Ontario Superior Court Justice Sally Gomery awarded $63,000 in general damages, $199,512 in past lost income, and $440,039 in future income loss to an Ottawa man who suffered head injuries after he was knocked from his feet by an opposing player in a 2012 “beer league” hockey game.

Suffered multiple injuries

The man sustained a concussion, two broken teeth and various facial cuts, the court heard, and since the incident he “suffers from crippling headaches about once a week, tires easily, and finds interactions with others difficult.

“He has given up most social, recreational, and sports activities, and cannot work more than two or three days per week,” the court was told.

Brown, who plays recreational hockey up to three times a week, says there is an expectation among participants in adult leagues “that there’s no body contact for the most part.”

“The goal of the game is to have fun so that when you wake up in the morning you can go to work,” he tells LegalMattersCanada.ca. “If you are going to come into these leagues you cannot play outside a manner a reasonable participant is going to play.

“There will be some incidental contact, there will be some stickwork, there will be some nudging and pushing but once it moves outside what a reasonable person would do, then you are playing recklessly and if you hit someone, you could be found negligent.” 

Brown says it comes down to cause and effect.

“Most people in cars don’t mean to run into people. But, looking down at their phone while driving is unreasonable and negligent,” he says.

‘Anticipated the collision’

In the case of the beer league player, Gomery finds that the defendant “anticipated the collision and could have avoided it.

“[He] was a skillful and experienced skater and hockey player. He had to have realized that, if he continued skating at high speed towards him, they would collide violently,” she writes. “[He] positioned his body in a way that anticipated the collision.”

Gomery writes “a person injured during a hockey game does not need to prove either an intent to injure or reckless disregard.

“The injured player must simply show that the injury was caused by conduct that fell outside of what a reasonable competitor would expect in the circumstances,” she says.

Brown says incidental contact can be expected within the course of a hockey game.

“It’s that whole voluntary assumption of risk,” he says. “It’s where you’ve got more of a deliberate or really negligent type of behaviour that falls outside of what is reasonable.”

Brown says personal injury claims involving adult league players are not unusual.

“I’ve already been successful in these cases,” he says. “I have a client right now who suffered a broken neck in a game. We’re alleging the defendant was outside the standard of what other people do. He came across the ice, hit a player and the player went down, and they both collided with the goalie.”

Brown says the people who play outside the rules leave themselves open to liability.

“Players going into these recreational hockey leagues have to conduct themselves with reasonableness because people can get hurt and if they get hurt you are going to get sued,” he says. “Play safe, play smart.”