0370 270 6000

Dodkins v West Ham United Plc

1 June 2000

Duty of Care – Football Club

The facts

The Claimant was a Season Ticket Holder. The Claimant went to watch the first match of the season arriving 2 hours before kick off. 5 yards from the gate into the car park and straight outside it was a man hole cover set in the pavement and forming part of the highway. The cover had been broken – probably by a vehicle leaving the car park or entering that afternoon. Security staff hired by the football club were at the ground all afternoon. One was at the gate to check and record every vehicle entering or leaving. The cover had been damaged while he was present. He ought to have seen or heard the damage but did nothing about it.

When the Claimant arrived it was not marked or sectioned off and there was no warning. The Claimant tripped and sprained his ankle. Subsequently the football club took steps to mark the hazard with traffic cones and board.

The decision

Although the hazard was outside the boundary this was not conclusive. The injury was foreseeable and the relationship was one of sufficient proximity to give rise to the duty and it was fair and reasonable to impose that duty.

Judgment in favour of the Claimant.

Focus on...

Legal updates

Court of Appeal confirms exclusive English jurisdiction clause in excess liability policies in Canadian pipeline dispute

On 10 June 2022 the Court of Appeal upheld an anti-suit injunction granted in favour of insurers by Mr Justice Jacobs in September 2021 restraining proceedings from being brought in Canada and enforcing the exclusive English jurisdiction clause in excess liability policies.



Payment Fraud landscape shaped by technology in 2021

Payment systems across Europe are under increased pressure to mitigate fraud risks and defend against persistent attacks from enablers using ever more sophisticated and malicious viruses and malware.


Legal updates

Gosden and another v Halliwell Landau and another [2021] EWHC 159 (Comm)

This claim addressed the question, of when the date for assessment of damages in cases of negligence should be determined and shows that when appropriate the Courts will depart from the default position.


Legal updates

Assessing the scope of employers liability – Chell v Tarmac

These were the opening remarks of Mr Justice Martin Spencer when handing down his Judgment in the recent case of Andrew Chell v Tarmac Cement and Lime Limited [2020] EWHC 2613, the latest in a series of appeals dealing with the scope of vicarious liability.


The content on this page is provided for the purposes of general interest and information. It contains only brief summaries of aspects of the subject matter and does not provide comprehensive statements of the law. It does not constitute legal advice and does not provide a substitute for it.

Mailing list sign up

Select which mailings you would like to receive from us.

Sign up