Uruguay striker Luis Suarez has bitten players three times throughout his career. On Tuesday June 24, 2014 Suarez, excited by the game, bit an Italian player Giorgio Chiellini (referees did not see the bite). In response, FIFA took action by banning Suarez for nine international matches and suspended for four months from any soccer (football) games titled by FIFA (“banned from any football related activity”). Whether or not the punishment will be enforced or appealed is yet to be seen.
✪ Luis Suarez assault and battery on Giorgio Chiellini? Suarez bit Chiellini during a world cup soccer (football) game.
Assault: Did Suarez assault Chiellini? An assault is (1) an act by the defendant (Suarez) that creates a reasonable apprehension in the plaintiff (Chiellini) of an immediate harmful or offensive contact; (2) the defendants intent to bring about an apprehension of the harmful or offensive contact to the plaintiff; and (3) the defendant acted in such a way that the act caused the apprehension of the plaintiff. Thus, whether or not Suarez assaulted Chiellini comes down to whether or not Chiellini was aware of Suarez’s attempt at biting (before the bite). Watch the replay to judge for yourself.
Battery: Did Suarez commit battery on Chiellini? A Battery is (1) an act by the defendant (Suarez) that makes harmful or offensive contact to the plaintiff (Chiellini); (2) the intent to contact the plaintiff; and, (3) the defendant’s act caused the contact. I believe nearly everyone will believe that being bit during a live broadcast of a FIFA World Cup Match 2014 is certainly harmful and offensive; likewise after viewing the video replay it is quite obvious Suarez intended to bite Chiellini, despite Suarez’s best feigned attempt.
✪ Would Chiellini succeed in civil court? It is possible. Had this act been a tackle, perhaps even a punch, Chiellini would lose because Suarez would raise the defense of consent (specifically implied consent). Implied consent is likely not available however unless a reasonable person would infer from Chiellini’s conduct (playing soccer/football) that being bit was acceptable and part of the game. This type of behavior (biting) might not be considered part of the game, thus Chiellini could win.
✪ Hockey is another story. In a recent opinion written by the Honorable Gordon J. Quist of Michigan’s Western District Court on Allianz Suisse v. Kevin Miller discussing due process and public policy of the judgment in Swiss court against Miller for the blindside check of Andrew McKim during a game. The Uniform Foreign Country Money Judgements Recognition Act adopted by Michigan appears to honor the finding against Miller for the conduct during the hockey game. Whether or not this case would survive had it been brought in Michigan, where hockey games are known for their relative violence was not discussed… but it makes for good reading.
