Abstract
Everybody who illegally harms another not only must recover the injured person, but also, may be committed a crime and be punished. According to this doctrine, every time that a participant in a sport activity touches a fellow player, or consciously runs the risk that an opponent may be touched during the game, an offence is committed and he or she is liable. This is clearly an unacceptable situation. If this were the usual way a participant in violence was dealt with by the courts, nobody would play sport, as the risk of conviction would be too great. Sport would be unable to continue in the form that we presently know it. On the other hand, sports often have inherent risks that cannot be eliminated without destroying the very essence of the activity. Consent and assumption of risk defenses in sport accident cases significantly affect resolving the conflict between performing sport as a useful and beneficial activity versus a dangerous practice, and prevent liability from being imposed for just participation in sport activity. Thus, discussion about these defenses can help athletes be more aware of their rights.