Portsmouth Youth Activities Committee v Poppleton [2008] EWC...

Facts

• Mr. Poppleton, an experienced climber, was injured while bouldering at an indoor climbing facility operated by Portsmouth Youth Activities Committee.
• The incident occurred when Mr. Poppleton fell during the activity and sustained severe injuries.
• The claimant argued that the facility failed to provide adequate safety measures, such as crash mats or supervision, given the naturally risky nature of the activity.
• The defendant was responsible for the operation and management of the climbing wall where the accident occurred.

Issues

1. Whether the operator of a recreational facility owes a duty of care to participants engaging in naturally risky activities such as bouldering.
2. Whether failure to provide additional safety measures constituted a breach of that duty.
3. To what extent the doctrine of voluntary assumption of risk (volenti non fit injuria) applies to participants in recreational activities.

Decision

• The Court of Appeal found that participants in recreational activities that are naturally risky must accept the natural risks associated with those activities.
• The absence of additional measures like crash mats or increased supervision did not amount to negligence by the defendant.
• Organisers are not required to eliminate all risks, especially those essential to the nature of the activity.
• The court emphasized the importance of personal responsibility and did not hold the operator liable for the claimant’s injuries.

Legal Principles

• The doctrine of voluntary assumption of risk (volenti non fit injuria) limits liability where participants knowingly accept the natural risks.
• Under the Occupiers' Liability Act 1957, organisers owe a duty to ensure a reasonable standard of safety, but not to remove all risks linked to the activity itself.
• Personal responsibility is central: individuals engaging in naturally risky pursuits bear the risk of those dangers.
• Organisers are expected to inform participants about the risks but not to make naturally risky activities entirely risk-free.

Conclusion

The decision clarified that organisers of recreational activities are not liable for injuries arising from the natural risks of those activities, provided a reasonable standard of care is met and participants are aware of the risks; personal responsibility remains a critical component in such contexts.