World Rugby and RFU among bodies trying to throw out ex-players’ concussion lawsuits

World ​Rugby and England and Wales' governing bodies have sought to throw out nearly 380 former rugby union players' lawsuits over neurological injuries, arguing their lawyers repeatedly failed to disclose ⁠key medical evidence.World Rugby, the Rugby Football Union (RFU) and the Welsh Rugby Union (WRU) are facing lawsuits from around 800 ex-amateur and professional players, who say repeated concussive and sub-concussive blows left them with serious neurological conditions. The claimants' ⁠lawyers allege the governing bodies breached ​their ⁠duty of care by failing to protect them from those risks, but World Rugby argues in its written defence that ⁠it had no such duty and that injuries are an "inherent risk" ​in ⁠rugby.

The case began in 2022 but has been beset by delays over disclosure, as has a parallel action by ex-rugby league players. World Rugby, the RFU and the ‌WRU have now asked London's High Court ‌to throw out claims brought by former rugby union players because their lawyers have breached court orders requiring them to provide records, including recordings of "neurology interviews" carried out ⁠before lawsuits began.RecommendedBen Earl calls for changes after ‘brutal’ Nations Championship travel demandsFin Smith admits England need to banish discipline issuesArgentina head coach Felipe Contepomi accuses England of ‘lack of respect’The Rugby Football League and the British Amateur Rugby League Association are similarly applying for around 130 ex-players' lawsuits to be thrown out.

Neil Block, a lawyer representing the RFU, told the court that "enough is enough". "These are important documents ... an order was made that we were entitled to have them and we have tried in ‌every way," he said.

Lawyers representing the claimants, however, say they have provided the vast majority of the documents required and that throwing out their claims would be an "extreme response". "This litigation is of significant public interest ⁠and societal importance for the continuance of contact/collision sports in the UK," their lawyer ‌Susan Rodway said ​in written arguments."It would be highly ‌undesirable for a significant number ​of the former players to lose their claims on procedural grounds."

ReutersJoin our commenting forumJoin thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their repliesComments