Us Brits like to play just as hard as we work, and that often means pushing ourselves (or moreover, our bodies) to the limits at the gym. Especially at this time of year, when more people than ever tend to hit health centres up and down the UK in a bid to shift the post-Christmas pounds and ultimately shape up for that distant summer holiday.
We all know the scenario, having observed an influx of new (and initially well-meaning) subscribers to the fitness cause once the holiday period is over and the New Year pans out ahead; typically eager to make good on their resolutions and focus on improving their body, as well as their mind and soul a timely boost.
The question on a lot of people’s lips though, is just what happens if you injure yourself at the gym? Whose responsibility is it and where do you stand with regards to seeking compensation should you suffer a damaging physical blow?
As health and fitness club opening hours are more accommodating than ever, coupled with tempting introductory offers and discounts making many of us sit up and take note, gym memberships are on the habitual rise at this time of year.
However with large numbers of often inexperienced would-be gym bunnies impatient to see immediate results many routinely go overboard from the outset as they strive to get into shape; which can lead to nasty consequences if the approach to their new-found routines is anything less than measured.
Unfortunately not everyone takes this attitude, and, well, we all know the phrase, ‘fools rush in where angels fear to tread’; and without being unkind, this can apply in a significant number of gym-based circumstances if you’re not mindful of your body’s limitations. Historically new gym-goers facilitate gym equipment with restricted first-hand experience as to what they’re actually doing (and the pressure they could be subjecting their muscles and tendons too as a subsequence). Alternatively – and away from the more gung-ho approach – there’s cases of people tripping, slipping or falling when exposed to wet or dangerous surface areas in and around a gym.
So, with these potential situations in mind, are you realistically entitled to make a personal injury claim in the event of injuring yourself at the gym or health club? As you might imagine it all rather depends on the circumstances of (and series of events which led up to) the incident which befalls you.
Gym operators may be liable to their members in various situations, and of course if they were found to have been negligent in one way or another then you’d be legally well-placed to instigate compensation-pursuing actions, if you could prove that their lack of actions/duty of care fell some way short of expectations/current legislation and effectively meant they were culpable.
While a gym proprietor is not always required to afford members training on specific (and admittedly, specialist) equipment use before they embark on their quests for fitness, they are nevertheless required to ensure that users are made aware of the possible dangers which could exist when utilising such apparatus.
The generally accepted rule of thumb in such cases rising from injuries sustained at gyms centre round that contentious area of liability. Essentially to find yourself in a favourable position from which to pursue compensation via a personal injury claim route, it’s vital that its proved beyond any reasonable doubt that the consequent injury came about as a direct result of negligence (or a failure in duty of care provisions) of the gym owners/operators.
As alluded to above, the proprietor of a health and fitness-based facility is contractually/lawfully obliged provide what’s described as a ‘safe environment’ by which members of the public can undertake the services which they (the proprietors) are proffering. If there’s any contravening of this by the gym operators, then this can pave the way for legal action to follow, if and when triggered by the member/injured party.
Naturally there are a number of precursors (and exclusions) to this understanding, a predominant example being that trainers (health and fitness club-employed) are NOT responsible should it materialise further down the line that the claimant had an underlying/existing injury which may have been aggravated by exercise programmes. Conversely though, trainers DO owe a duty of care not to exacerbate the injury courtesy of their own negligent acts or perceived recklessness of instruction/behaviour at the time injury was pronounced.
Again, and for the record, a claimant WOULD likely be financially compensated (or entitled from the outset to seek recompense from the accused party) if it was established that the accident occurred when the claimant was under their tutelage/care, and that ostensibly they were deemed to have compromised an expected duty of care. In theory (and regularly applied practice), the trainer’s employer could well be referred to as liable for the resultant injuries suffered by a claimant through what’s called ‘vicarious liability’, more pertinently if the accident took place in the course of the trainer’s employment (and it can be proven that they breached their duty of care to their client through poor exercise instructions, as an example).
Breaking possible legal outcomes down into the two clearly defined areas on which award of compensation would be forthcoming, and the first determines whether or not there was a duty of care owed by the party responsible for the injury to the claimant. Addressing this there must be an assessment which works twofold; in as much as examining the likelihood that someone may be injured (and the severity of the injury) as well as the ‘social value’ of the activity which gives rise to the risk and the cost of preventative measures.
Once in receipt of the knowledge pertaining to both these fundamental accounts, they are then balanced against one another (usually by a court) to decide if a finding of liability may prevent a desirable activity (i.e, organised sporting facilities, such as a gym/health club) from being undertaken.
The second consideration which require deliberation over in this context is that surrounding the eventuality that the party that caused the injury failed to observe a fundamental duty of care. Often more challenging to fulfil – as circumstantial evidence must first be established – parties concerned will attempt to gain evaluation of the gym equipment, facilities and/or medical reports relating to the injuries sustained by the claimant.
This evidence will depend heavily on the exacting circumstances of the individual case, however, the claimant must not only show that they have sustained an injury, but also that it has been caused by a clear breach of duty.
Finally, if and when liability is concluded (and blame has been apportioned to the offending party), ‘measure of damages’ needs to be thrashed out. Where large-chains of leisure operators are cited, it’s commonplace for injuries to agreed and settled on by the parties’ insurers, avoiding the additional hassle and expense incurred by pressing for court procedures to take effect.
For the most part the real test in bringing claims of this ilk is to rightly identify the best options for a successful recovery, and in all honesty (and based on experience) this is rarely via laborious and costly court proceedings involving litigation. That’s why if unequivocal evidence as to a specific injury is presented, a mutually acceptable settlement tends to be offered by insurance providers to side-step the courts becoming embroiled in what could be a long and drawn-out process of claim and counter claim. Which is why it’s imperative to acquire sufficient documented evidence re: the injury suffered at an early stage, and moreover so as to optimise the chance of success.
Full library of resources to learn more about the different types of personal injury and the claims processPersonal Injury Resources