Barnes v Scout Association [2010]

Court: Court of Appeal

Facts: A thirteen-year-old boy scout was injured during a game organized by his scout troupe, which involved running in a dark hall to retrieve a block. The game’s objective was to capture a block placed in the middle of the hall, with players who failed to do so being eliminated. The claimant was hurt while chasing a block that had been kicked away by another player. He sued the Scout Association, alleging negligence in organizing the game.

Issue: Whether the Scout Association breached its duty of care by organizing a game that led to the claimant’s injury, particularly considering the social value of the activity versus the risks involved.

Held: The Court of Appeal found the Scout Association liable for negligence. The court recognized the significant social value of the Scout Association’s activities, acknowledging that such activities often involve inherent risks. However, it held that the level of risk must be reasonable and proportionate to the social benefit of the activity.

The court concluded that the decision to play the game in darkness did not contribute to the social value and introduced an unnecessary and unjustifiable level of risk. Therefore, the court found that the Scout Association had breached its duty of care by exposing participants to a risk that was not justified by the benefits of the activity.

Key Judicial Statement: The court emphasized that while activities with social value may involve some risk, the risk must be acceptable and proportionate to the benefits. The extra risk introduced by playing in the dark was not deemed justifiable.

💡 LevelUpLaw: Barnes v Scout Association established that when assessing negligence in activities with social value, the level of risk must be reasonable and proportionate to the benefits provided. If the risk exceeds what is justified by the social value of the activity, the organizer may be found negligent. The case underscores that social benefits do not excuse unjustifiable risks.