DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
ComeAllWithin (Harlequins Rugby)
HTML https://comeallwithin.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: ComeAllWithin Board
*****************************************************
#Post#: 156623--------------------------------------------------
Rugby’s landmark concussion case enters crucial week: the key
questions answered
DIR By: deadlyfrom5yardsout
Date: July 22, 2026, 3:15 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Rugby’s landmark concussion case enters crucial week: the key
questions answered
The outcome of this week’s hearings could determine the entire
direction of the case – we explain the current state of play
Andy Bull
Wed 22 Jul 2026 08.00 BST
It has been nearly six years since the Guardian first reported
that a group of former rugby union players were bringing legal
action against the game’s governing authorities because they
were enduring brain injuries which they believe were caused by
their playing careers. There are now two separate cases, one in
rugby league and one in rugby union, involving hundreds of
former amateur and professional players.
The two cases are being heard together because they have so many
overlapping issues. They are both still in the pre-trial phase,
as the legal teams try to agree on exactly what the size, shape
and structure of the trials ought to be when they finally start.
The process has been slowed by an interminable argument over
whether or not the claimants’ legal team have complied fully
with their obligation to disclose to the defence all available
medical documents, which they agreed to do to spare the
defendants the task of conducting their own separate testing on
the players. This week, however, marks a key staging post, and
the outcome of the hearings could determine the entire direction
of the case.
Who is in court this week?
Rylands Garth is the firm representing the players in both
codes, with the help of Leigh Day, who have been consulting on
the case for six months. In rugby union, they are bringing
action against World Rugby, the Rugby Football Union and the
Welsh Rugby Union. In rugby league they are bringing action
against the Rugby Football League. They represent 777 former
union players, and 317 former league players. The two sides are
supposed to select a small number of trial cases from among the
hundreds and then agree on a smaller number of test cases who
will then stand trial on behalf of the entire group.
Why are they in court?
The latest hearings are being held to try to resolve procedural
issues. By far the most important issue is whether or not
Rylands Garth has complied fully with a judge’s order to
disclose to the defendants all the medical documents relating to
all these players. If the judge decides they have not, any
players whose documents have not been provided in full would be
liable to be struck out from the case. This could conceivably
mean that hundreds of the players involved are removed from the
proceedings. Rylands Garth insists that it has complied with the
order, and will seek relief against any ruling otherwise.
If there are strikeouts what does it mean for the players?
Any players who are found to have gaps in the documents provided
on their behalf would be removed from the group involved in the
trial. The rest may find that the credibility of Rylands Garth
has been so badly undermined that continuing the action becomes
impossible. This has been a source of distress for many of the
players, many of whom have been diagnosed with neurodegenerative
conditions, depression and anxiety.
Why has it taken so long to get to trial?
The case is hugely complex. It involves hundreds of players
spread across two codes, with a variety of conditions. There is
no ready template to use for the case. Every little detail has
to be argued and agreed in real time between three combative
legal teams and neither side wants to cede ground to the other.
The defendants’ legal team would argue that Rylands Garth is
under‑resourced for the size of the task it has taken on,
and that it has failed to provide all the necessary medical
documents referred to in its own arguments. Rylands Garth would
argue that the defendants are trying to smother them with an
impossible workload to stop the case coming to trial, and that
many of the documents requested are either irrelevant or
impossible to obtain.
Senior Master Cook, mindful of the claimants, is continually
urging all sides to be more collaborative. It never seems to
make much difference.
#Post#: 156648--------------------------------------------------
Re: Rugby’s landmark concussion case enters crucial week: the
key questions answered
DIR By: Brown Bottle
Date: July 22, 2026, 11:23 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Lawyer leading rugby’s concussion lawsuit quits
HTML https://archive.ph/z0zGg
Richard Boardman has presumably realised at last that he's out
of his depth. I really hope he's not going to make any money out
of this.
#Post#: 156653--------------------------------------------------
Re: Rugby’s landmark concussion case enters crucial week: the
key questions answered
DIR By: Rugbycat
Date: July 22, 2026, 1:12 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Brown Bottle link ---
>
> Lawyer leading rugby’s concussion lawsuit quits
HTML https://archive.ph/z0zGg
>
> Richard Boardman has presumably realised at last that he's out
of his depth. I really hope he's not going to make any money out
of this.
>
--- End Quote ---
They are losing money have had a number of cost hearings found
against them, and been forced to pay costs, the medical
assessment fees are estimated to be £3.5m but these are
underwritten by a litigation funder.
They have also made failed attempts to sue players who have
withdrawn from the action and are under investigation by the
solicitors regulation authority.
#Post#: 156662--------------------------------------------------
Re: Rugby’s landmark concussion case enters crucial week: the
key questions answered
DIR By: deadlyfrom5yardsout
Date: July 23, 2026, 1:31 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I am sure all these arguments have been well rehearsed before
but if I walk a mile in one of the claimants shoes I do have
certain misgivings. I can clearly remember being told not to
head the ball one wet and soggy day in Primary School by the
Teacher because it might damage my bonce, bearing in mind it was
the days of Dubbin and laced up footballs....
It cannot have come as a surprise to Rugby players that clashing
heads was really not very good for you and you do wonder if the
RFU issued strict instructions to never avoid head contact thus
perhaps making them liable now in these court proceedings?
Apart from anything else and don't get me wrong, I am
desperately sorry for the victims of head trauma and will help
and support them in any way possible but sueing the RFU is just
taking money out of grassroots Rugby which I assume the
sufferers still love? Or is it Insurers that are being sued? (In
which case, fill yer boots, son...)
#Post#: 156668--------------------------------------------------
Re: Rugby’s landmark concussion case enters crucial week: the
key questions answered
DIR By: Rugbycat
Date: July 23, 2026, 3:20 am
---------------------------------------------------------
This what was said five years ago
English rugby union’s top official says the sport is safe to
play and that the future of the Rugby Football Union is not at
risk from possible multi-million compensation claims made by
brain damaged former players. Bill Sweeney, the RFU’s chief
executive, does say, however, that the union are wary of the
potential impact on the game’s image and that making rugby
entirely risk-free is “a journey with no conclusion”.
Like everyone else the RFU has been “very sad and distressed” to
learn that the 2003 World Cup-winning hooker Steve Thompson is
among a number of players showing signs of early onset dementia
in their early 40s. As yet, however, Twickenham is still
awaiting precise details of the proposed legal proceedings and
Sweeney believes his organisation would be insured in the event
of any huge future payout.
“I’ve got no reason to believe we wouldn’t be covered for this,
but we’re not going into that detailed discussion until we see
the nature of what is being submitted,” said Sweeney. “It’s
hypothetical at this stage because we don’t know what ‘this’ is
yet.”
HTML https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/dec/11/rfu-says-it-can-fund-dementia-payouts-from-insurance-if-necessary
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 1