header-logo header-logo

22 October 2015
Issue: 7673 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Bridge: a mind game but not a sport

Bridge is not a sport, the High Court has held. Ruling in R (English Bridge Union) v Sport England [2015] EWHC 2875 (Admin), Mr Justice Dove held that Sport England and other sporting bodies are legally correct in using the European Sports Charter’s definition of sport as “all forms of physical activity”. Therefore, while bridge is often referred to as a “mind sport”, it did not satisfy the requisite of physical activity.

Dove J noted in his judgment that the International Olympic Committee and some other international organisations do recognise bridge as a sport. Moreover, the Charities Act 2011 defines sport as including “mental skill or exertion”.

He stated, however, that: “The fact that the Charities Act may include ‘mind sports’ does not imply or provide any power for Sport England to fund activities without a physical element: our duty is to operate within the confines of our Charter and the legal convention on the interpretation of its terms is to do so narrowly.”

Issue: 7673 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll