Hetherington v Fell and Ferryhill Wheelers Cycling Club: A Landmark Judgment

A recent High Court judgment in Hetherington v Fell and Ferryhill Wheelers Cycling Club has become a significant legal milestone for volunteer-run sports organisations across the UK. The case is particularly notable as one of the first known judicial interpretations of the Social Action, Responsibility and Heroism Act 2015 (SARHA) in the context of sporting events and community activities.

Background of the Case

On 23^rd May 2019, cyclist Benjamin Hetherington was seriously injured whilst participating in a time trial event organised by his cycling club, Ferryhill Wheelers Cycling Club. Whilst competing, Hetherington collided with a vehicle driven by Raymond Fell who failed to stop at a give way line, whilst driving at approximately 20 mph.

The impact caused Hetherington to strike the rear passenger side of Fell’s vehicle. Hetherington suffered severe injuries including a brain injury and multiple fractures. He was airlifted to hospital.

Hetherington issued court proceedings against Fell for negligence. Fell initially denied negligence and brought a Part 20 contribution claim against Ferryhill Wheelers Cycling Club. A Part 20 contribution claim is when a defendant brings another party into the claim because they believe that other party should contribute for some of the amount, they may have to pay the Claimant.

Fell alleged that Ferryhill Wheelers Cycling Club’s risk assessments were inadequate and that they failed to provide adequate signs and a sufficient number of marshals.

Shortly before trial, more than 5 years after the accident, Fell’s insurers admitted full liability but continued with the claim for contribution. The cycling club denied liability asserting that the time trial complied with all relevant regulations and that Fell’s negligence was the sole cause. They also argued that imposing a high duty of care on volunteer-run clubs would discourage community-led events.

Court Judgement

Mr Justice Richie dismissed the Part 20 claim against the cycling club. The court accepted that both the club and its national body owed a duty of care to riders when carrying out risk assessments, not only in respect of on the day hazards but also as to potential conflicts with negligent third-party drivers.

However, the court applied a pragmatic standard i.e. that of “a reasonably competent and reasonably informed volunteer”, not the stringent standards expected of large employers. This approach was heavily influenced by SARHA.

The court emphasised that even if the cycling club had done more, Fell’s failure to observe existing signs and road rules was the true cause. Therefore, any alleged breach of duty would not have been the cause. Ultimately, even if there was a breach by the cycling club, it did not cause the loss or damage claimed.

SARHA 2015: A Turning Point

This case marks one of the first known judicial uses of SARHA. It requires courts to consider whether the defendant was acting for the benefit of society and whether they acted in a predominantly responsible way.

In this case, Ferryhill Wheelers Cycling Club’s efforts to organise a community sporting event were recognised as beneficial social action. The standard of care was therefore moderated to reflect their volunteer status and limited resources without removing the duty of care entirely.

Practical Implications

Volunteer organisations have some legal protection: The judgment affirms that courts should adopt a realistic standard of care for volunteer-run organisations acknowledging the limited resources and non-profit nature of such groups.

Duty of care still exists: Whilst the standard is lowered, it is not removed. Organisations must still carry out adequate risk assessments, deploy signs and marshals and act responsibly.

Primary responsibility remains with drivers: Drivers must obey the Highway Code and adapt to everyday conditions as organisers are not expected to mitigate every foreseeable hazard.

Reassurance for community events: SARHA provides a level of protection for organisations acting responsibly and this should not discourage community-led events.

How Pinney Talfourd Can Help

If you have any questions about this case or need advice following an accident, please contact our experienced Personal Injury team on 01708 511 000 for clear, tailored guidance.