Mithras
Well-Known Member
I don't think it's a bad thing to raise - there are certainly parallels in the two situations. I'm just wary of overdoing the comparison
Its a very valid comparison to make in legal terms though. There is a lot of case law on how not wearing a seatbelt constitutes contributory negligence and means a percentage reduction in damages claims. I'm not aware of any similar case law on not wearing a riding hat. If anyone can find any, then post it please. I do think its something that HOYS should have researched, ie they should have researched the correct legal position, before making this ruling, and issuing vague statements which appear to indicate a legal statutory change is forthcoming.
I do question whether it will increase their duty of care to a very high standard too and in cases where wearing helmets are not involved. Since the likliehood of being injured from a kick injury is probably just as high if not higher, should everyone near a horse at HOYS not be required to also wear a helmet? What about body protectors?
The trouble with this sort of piecemeal, nit picking, risk averse approach is that great swathes tend to be missed out.