A sports activity is inherently a risk inherent in the occurrence of an accident. Therefore, each competition group has been trying to prevent accidents by changing the competition rules for safety measures. For example, in the boxing world title match, the 15th game in the 1980s was reduced to 12 rounds for safety. In rugby, the rule of play governing unfair play, Article 10 (j), spear tackle falling from the upper body to the ground with opponents who were formerly considered as a reason for the existence of rugby, was imposed a strict penalty. In fact, there was a case where one Wales player with this kind of tackle was sent off in the 2011 Rugby World Cup semi-finals, before Francs vs. Wales. However, it is impossible to completely prevent accidents, even if participating in sports activities is the best effort in each position. In other words, it can be pointed out that accidents during sporting activities are inevitable risks, but the risks are not simply that the sports participants win. This is because, in the end, the victim may be able to find damages, so it may be possible to develop the risks associated with the whole sports activity participant, for example, those who manage and supervise the sporting activity. However, if you have speculated about the number of accidents during a sporting activity, there are only a few cases where claims for damages and actual disputes can be made. This is because sports are indigenous to the autonomous world, distinct from the public world, and have been passively refraining from the intervention of law in sports accidents. In addition, even in the case of an actual dispute, the offender’s actions are likely to be fragmented, and the remaining defendant’s responsibility has been limited. In this regard, it is difficult to assume that there is a sufficient level of self-responsibility for all sports participants due to the widespread popularization of sports in the recognition of civil liability these days.
In France, the logic of the sport law, which is the basis of the sport legislation, compiled in 2006, shows that sport and physical activity are important elements of education, culture, national integration and social life. In particular, it is aimed at anyone who contributes to the war against school failures, to narrowing the social and cultural gap, and to maintaining health. It can also be seen that the promotion and development of sports and physical activities, especially those with disabilities, is in the public interest, and that sports activities play a public role. In addition, the social situation in these days of increasing publicity of sporting activities expands the possibility of considering the improvement of victim compensation in dispute resolution of accidents during sporting activities.
In fact, the decision could be considered to be a result of the view of victim relief, with the decision to further limit the application of the law of risk taking, which gives the possibility of the exemption of the offender's liability in recent civil cases in France. It is. Moreover, the cardboard at the trial subsequently influenced the sports legislation on civil liability in accidents during sporting activities. In this study, we consider the details of this case of civil liability for accidents in sporting activities in France, with the view of the application of the law of the argument of risk.