Football liability: the need for fault characterized by a violation of the rules of the game

During a football match, a player is injured by a tackle from the opposing team's goalkeeper who went outside his penalty area. This is sanctioned with a yellow card by the referee.

The tackle having caused a fracture of the tibia and fibula of the player's left leg, he brought an action for liability and compensation against the goalkeeper, his Club and their insurer.

In a judgment of 20 November 2012, the Caen Court of Appeal rejected his requests

To rule out the fault of the goalkeeper, the judges held that his behavior "was not analyzed by the referee as that of a player moved by an excess of combativeness but as unsportsmanlike behavior".

According to the 2nd Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation, the fact that the goalkeeper was sanctioned by a yellow card from the referee, "with the only broad and ambiguous assessment of unsportsmanlike behavior","is not sufficient to establish the existence of brutal wrongful behavior likely to give rise to civil liability"The goalkeeper.

In addition, the injured player does not earn the "proof of a fault characterized by a violation of the rules of the game", the only element making it possible to engage the responsibility of the goalkeeper.

Indeed, "the evidence provided in the debates does not allow us to retain that [the goalkeeper] wanted to block [the player] at all costs because he was approaching dangerously the goal and the violence, brutality or disloyalty of his gesture, his disproportionate or superfluous force, cannot be deduced from the sole gravity of his injuries"

The Court of Cassation therefore confirms the judgment of the Court of Appeal which "could decide that the responsibility [Goalkeeper] was not engaged".

The appeal is therefore dismissed.