First National Preventive Health Research Programme  YELP Holistic First Business Plan    YELP Holistic First Business Plan Defined Terms   SWOT Analysis   Executive Summary   Deliverables And Costs   Snapshot Page To 10 Benchmark Techniques   Defined Terms for Five YELP Business Plans

Second National Preventive Health Research Programme      Bohemian Teenagers Arts Assistance Programme

First BTAAP Business Plan      Bohemian Teenagers Show Choir Programme        Defined Terms BTSCP

Second BTAAP Business Plan    Bohemian Teenagers Symphony Orchestras Programme    Defined Terms - Bohemian Teenager Symphony Orchestra Programme

Third BTAAP Business Plan    Bohemian Teenager Ballet & Modern Dance Programme        Defined Terms BTB&MDCP

23.        Liability Risk Management

The Civil Liability Acts, which were enacted in 2002 in each Australian state and territory, place a material onus on Inviters to a Recreational Activity where there is a Risk Of Harm to Provide A Risk Warning (in any invitation to participate in a Recreational Activity) to Invitees in order to mitigate trauma accidents and often associated litigation. 

 

These relatively new tort laws require the Inviter to include in his/her Risk Warning details of all Obvious Risks, Inherent Risks and Foreseeable, Non-Obvious, Explicit Risks. 

 

A lot of effort was expended in 2002 to amend associated tort laws in the Civil Liability Acts in order to transfer significant liability from Inviters to Invitees by the latter taking greater personal responsibility for their actions.  Alas, insignificant effort was made by the judicial process to inform Inviters of their legal obligation to Provide A Risk Warning to Invitees under these new tort laws.

The Second Business Plan under the First National Preventive Health Research Programme explains that too many enthusiastic Ride Organisers and Ride Leaders in Community Bicycle Groups under-state the risks, much as the snow skiing industry did for many years, so as not to discourage prospective new Cyclists.  Such enthusiasm to encourage others to experience the "joys" that they themselves enjoy, could cost those Ride Organisers and/or Ride Leaders dearly, if they did not provide a Risk Warning to an Invitee(s), particularly if it was a new recruit who was seriously injured, that the Ride Organisers and/or Ride Leaders had induced to join their bicycle ride.

The Ride Organisers and/or Ride Leaders could be equally liable if the new recruit seriously injured a third party and the Ride Organisers and Ride Leaders had not warned the Invitee(s) to hold third party insurance cover.

In the case of NSW, Civil Liability Amendment (Personal Responsibility) Act 2002 No 92, in particular Division 5 Recreational Activities, provides comfort to the Research Programme Team and the Business Plan Developer that working on the Primary Research Programme will not expose themselves (Research Programme Team and the Business Plan Developer) to third party public liability or professional indemnity risk, as Clause 5M(1) transfers liability from volunteer organisers to participants which choose to participate in a Recreational Activity where there is a Risk Of Harm, provided those Invitees/participants receive a Risk Warning which warns of the Three Types of Risks. 

Suffice that Muggaccinos' volunteer ride organiser, Phil Johnston (the Business Plan Developer), provides a Risk Warning to participant cyclists in each Sunday ride invitation of the Three Types of Risks, including warning of the need for participants to hold third party public liability insurance which covers their negligence whilst cycling, and also alerts of the Ride Participant's Liability Acknowledgment, thereby overcoming the likelihood of a participant cyclist litigating the Business Plan Developer should one of the Three Types of Risks result in a Risk Of Harm materialising and Harm Being Suffered.

Community Driven Regulation To Minimise Trauma Accidents explains that RECs, and those FOFs who possess Liability Risk Management Acumen, will agree templates for the below Risk Management Protocols:

(a)        Risk Warnings which set out all Three Types Of Risks, for each of the RREAs, to minimise future trauma accidents amongst participants in RREAs and often associated litigation.

(b)        Participant Liability Acknowledgments, for each of the RREAs, which set out the Inviters/organiser's Duty Of Care to its Invitees/participants and each participant's Duty Of Care to each other participant.

(c)        pertinent Training Procedures to Acquire Theoretical Knowledge for each RREA in order to minimise Serious Sporting Accidents.

Because the 2002 Civil Liability Acts were enacted to reduce public liability premiums by reducing the opportunities for punitive damages, participants in RAs now take greater personal responsibility for their actions.  However, these Civil Liability Acts paid scant regard for any negative impact on Health Care Costs resulting from an increase in trauma accidents due to Invitees/participants being less informed or Risks Of Harm.

The YELP Holistic First Business Plan is a Preventive Health programme.  Minimising trauma accidents is a significant part of Preventive Health, particularly during an era when government is encouraging leaving the car in the garage and cycling to public transport or to work.  Hence, RECs, and those Pioneer FOFs who possess Liability Risk Management Acumen, would agree templates for Risk Management Protocols to appear on the YELP Website to Regulate Existing Sporting Activity Providers to thereby equip Invitees with maximum practical knowledge to remain safe whilst participating in RREAs.

Below is an extract of the final section "PUBLIC HEALTH CLASH WITH LIABILITY LAWS?" of Public Health Policy and Personal Responsibility in Sport - Competitive or Collaborative? by Ruth Townsend, Faculty of Law, Charles Sturt University:

"PUBLIC HEALTH CLASH WITH LIABILITY LAWS?
Public health activities combine community collaborations with partnerships for health.  Community recreation and sporting clubs rely on being able to secure insurance to run their organisations.  Community sports and recreation clubs form part of the front-line public health response to fighting the obesity epidemic. As such they should be supported by the government.  This involves the government encouraging members of the community into physical activity and participation in sports and recreation.  It also involves assisting these clubs to provide this service safely, to stay viable and to procure insurance.
The Civil Liability laws were designed to ensure that small clubs and councils could continue to provide sport and recreational facilities without running a risk of litigation that would have resulted in the loss of their insurance premiums and subsequent inability to operate.
Have the liability laws served their purpose? Ipp argues that it is a matter of balance.
Certainly the number of claims has substantially lessened, but those cases that have been litigated have perhaps led to some surprising results.
Protection is provided for community organisations where they ensure there are Risk Warning and well-constructed waivers - Liability Disclaimer  - for participants. Indeed, there is great social utility in the type of recreational activities and sports that are offered by community groups.  Balance is achieved by ensuring that the playing field is level, that the teams are even and that the competition is fair.  Public health law espouses the virtues of community in tackling public health issues and in the case of obesity, sport and recreation forms part of the forward pack.
Civil liability laws provide the necessary support for the community clubs and organisations to continue moving forward.  Enabled by those laws, they may well score a goal against ‘Team Obesity’."

Ruth Townsend's Public Health Policy and Personal Responsibility in Sport - Competitive or Collaborative? has not identified any risks to the YELP SPV,  Interested Parties,  Equity Holders or to RECs that the YELP Holistic First Business Plan in Liability Risk Management Acumen, Risk Management Protocols and Training Procedures has not mitigated.

Risk Management Protocols under YELP will materially address Inviters being much better informed of their legal obligation to Provide A Risk Warning to Invitees to the benefit of all parties, thereby -

A.        reducing future Serious Sporting Accidents due to Invitees better understanding the Three Types Of Risks of Harm Sufferable; and

B.        reducing the likelihood of subsequent litigation which could materially discourage Organisers and RECs.

See definitions of Risk Warning, Provide A Risk Warning, Dangerous Recreational Activity, Recreational Activity and Regulate Existing Sporting Activity Providers.