Liability for Falls - Lessons from Cook v RDA for equestrian boards and associations
Equestrian and sporting associations play a vital role in community life. Board members of state and national bodies accept considerable responsibility with their position, including accountability for how risk is managed across programs, clubs and events. They must ensure that governance frameworks, safety policies and operational systems are not only in place, but actively working to protect participants and the organisation. In high-risk activities like horse riding, where injuries can have life-changing consequences, this duty becomes even more critical. The Supreme Court’s decision in Cook v Riding for the Disabled Association (NSW) offers lessons for board members and executive leaders on how risk management systems must be designed, implemented and enforced.
Sporting associations in Australia often operate under a tiered structure: national bodies set policy and frameworks, state associations coordinate delivery and compliance and local clubs engage directly with members on the ground. But when it comes to safety and legal risk, responsibility does not rest solely at the local level. National and state boards and executives must ensure that their governance frameworks adequately manage foreseeable risks in how activities are designed, delivered and supervised. This is especially true in high-risk sports like equestrian, where injuries can be life-changing for participants and trigger significant consequences for the organisation.
The Supreme Court’s decision in Cook v Riding for the Disabled Association (NSW) [2024] NSWSC 1332 offers valuable lessons for board members and executive leaders about how risk management systems must be designed, implemented and enforced.
The facts
The case involved a 10 year old child with physical and intellectual disabilities who was participating in a Riding for the Disabled (RDA) trail ride. During the session, the child fell from the horse and sustained a neck fracture.
RDA had an extensive operational framework. Its rider intake process included medical assessments, GP sign-off and documentation of support needs. Coaches assessed each rider and determined appropriate supervision – such as assigning “side walkers” to walk alongside the horse and physically support the rider if required. Initially, this child had two side walkers. By the eighth session, the coach assessed that she was riding confidently and reduced this to one. The child fell during that session.
The Court’s finding: breach of duty
Sporting associations owe a duty of care to take reasonable steps to ensure the safety of participants during activities they organise or oversee. The Court acknowledged the exceptional work of RDA, its coaches and volunteers. But it found, regretfully, that the organisation had breached its duty of care to the child by not assigning two side walkers at all times. The child’s intellectual disability meant that she could not understand or follow instructions, and that factor should have been determinative. The RDA was held vicariously liable for the coach’s decision in not assigning two side walkers. The Court also noted that as the coach was paid a nominal amount for her time, she was not a “volunteer”, and therefore could not enjoy immunity from civil liability under s 61 of the Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW).
If the Cook v RDA decision had revealed governance failures - such as a board ignoring prior safety concerns, failing to implement or enforce known risk protocols, or allowing inconsistent practices to continue - it could have exposed directors to personal liability or regulatory scrutiny. Courts and insurers increasingly expect boards to take an active role in overseeing safety systems, particularly in high-risk sectors like equine sport.
Lessons for associations
Board members and executives of national and state sporting bodies – particularly those governing high-risk or disability inclusive programs – should carefully consider several governance responsibilities:
Systems must replace discretion – risk management cannot rely solely on coach or volunteer judgment. Policies must be codified, with clearly defined criteria for supervision and applied consistently across clubs.
Risk management is a board issue – risk decisions made at the activity level can expose the entire organisation to liability. Boards must ensure they have appropriate oversight, training frameworks and audit mechanisms.
Supportive systems must be actioned, not just drafted – a policy is not a safeguard unless it is communicated, embedded and actively used in decision-making.
Intellectual disability must be explicitly factored in – the Court made clear that cognitive and behavioural factors carry weight in determining supervision needs. This must be embedded into rider assessments and not left to evolving, informal observations.
Review employment, insurance and consent frameworks – boards should be aware of potential liability exposure for both the organisation and its personnel. While volunteers may have some statutory protections in certain circumstances, these do not extend to employees and liability risks can vary depending on roles and arrangements. Insurance coverage, including Directors & Officers and public liability policies, should be carefully reviewed. Consent and intake processes (particularly where sensitive medical information is collected) should be designed with privacy and legal compliance in mind. These are complex issues that warrant tailored legal advice.
A structured risk framework is essential
At PURE Equine Law, we work with sporting and equestrian organisations to build practical, robust legal frameworks that protect participants and the organisation. This includes:
Designing clear risk assessment tools.
Standardising safety protocols.
Training coaches and clubs to apply policies consistently.
Auditing delivery and identifying gaps before a claim arises.
Strengthening intake, consent and privacy management systems.
PURE Equine Law partners with boards and executives to deliver tailored legal and risk systems that work in your field. Contact us to discuss how we can support your organisation on retainer or via a tailored engagement.
*Information is general and not legal advice.
