The Tel Aviv District Court accepted the player's claim when Maccabi Haifa and Ruben Raius, who caused irreparable damage, will be held responsible

• Dahan, in the days following the serious injury. An unprecedented decision

  Photo:

  Yossi Seliger

In March 2014, Maccabi Haifa hosted Bnei Yehuda in Kiryat Eliezer for a league game. Toward the end of the game, Ruben Raius, the then-Spanish player of the Greens, slipped to the foot of Rafi Dahan, the Orange player and interrupted the 24-year-old young midfielder's career. Nearly six years after that incident, Dahan received (two) good news this morning after difficult years when the Tel Aviv District Court decided that the player would be compensated by Maccabi Haifa, Raius and the insurance company representing them following a lawsuit he filed.

After hearing evidence from the parties, the court rejected defendants' claim that it was an ordinary and routine case that is an integral part of any football game and rejected their claim that as a matter of court policy, courts should not discuss tort claims for bodily injury caused during sports games.

The court ruled that the rule was that the courts would not interfere with bodily injuries that occur during sports games, but held that this was an exceptional case. In addition, according to testimony from the game referee, who testified that Raius intended to hit Dahan and not take over the ball, to analyze the pre-injury game events that indicated Raius' anger and frustration during the game and to analyze the violent manner. The court examined the world's usual approaches In similar cases and stated that the correct approach is that not every case of incorrect and erroneous discretion will be held liable, nor any intentional violation, but there are exceptional cases where liability must be imposed.

Performed in Maccabi Tel Aviv uniforms. Career interrupted at an early age // Photo: Ami Shuman

The court ruled that the accumulation of evidence in this case leads to the conclusion that it was an intentional act done by Raius intentionally, or at the very least with full awareness of the unusual risk he created and complete indifference on his part to the expected outcome, rather than accidentally taking over the ball. It was determined that, although the easiest approach towards Raius was to be held accountable.

The court emphasized that imposing liability in exceptional cases, such as this, as is common throughout the world, when there is a flagrant exception and the rules of the game involving a serious injury to a rival player, policy considerations are required to preserve the integrity of players during sports activities and to convey a message of the herd Tolerance of violent and unusual acts that are not a natural part of a football game.

The court heard evidence of the salary he could have earned had it not been for the injury and ultimately put the total amount of compensation for his past and future damages on the sum of NIS 4 million. The National Insurance Institute, which paid and paid retire as a casualty, will receive 75% of the amount and the balance will be transferred to Dahan.