Solicitor dismissed by rugby claimants continues to represent footballers in brain-injury litigation
A solicitor who was dropped by a large group of rugby players pursuing brain injury claims remains listed as lead counsel for a separate group of former footballers. At a hearing at the Royal Courts of Justice this week, Richard Boardman said he intended to "come off the record," while claimants stated they had unanimously agreed to cease dealings with his firm, Rylands Garth.
The controversy follows the decision by more than 1,000 rugby players with brain injuries to dismiss Boardman from their action against the sport’s governing bodies. Despite that mass dismissal, Boardman continues to act for dozens of ex-professional footballers pursuing similar brain-injury claims, a group that includes the family of Nobby Stiles. The two sets of claimants are separate, but the overlap in subject matter has put scrutiny on representation and conduct in high-profile historic-injury litigation.
At the Royal Courts of Justice hearing this week, Boardman formally signalled his intention to withdraw his appearance by saying he wished to "come off the record," a phrase he used in open court. Claimants present for the footballers’ claim told the bench they had unanimously agreed to terminate their relationship with his firm, Rylands Garth. Those statements were entered into the court proceedings and form part of the public record that tracks how representation is changing in these cases.
The rugby group’s decision to remove Boardman attracted attention because it involved a very large cohort — more than 1,000 former players — who are collectively suing the governing bodies of that sport over alleged brain injuries. In contrast, the football claim involves dozens of claimants, among them the family of former England and Manchester United midfielder Nobby Stiles. The files for the two actions remain separate, but the developments in one have prompted reporting and questions about the other.
Rylands Garth remains the law firm associated with Boardman in the documentation relating to the footballers’ claim, even as the claimants say they have agreed to end dealings with the firm. The hearing established an official record of both Boardman’s stated wish to step back and of the claimants’ unanimous decision regarding their engagement with his firm. Those entries will inform any administrative steps the court must take to update the records of representation.
The situation leaves the footballers’ case in a position where formal adjustments to legal representation will now be reflected in court paperwork following the hearing. The exchange at the Royal Courts of Justice confirmed both the solicitor’s stated intent and the claimants’ communicated decision about Rylands Garth. How the claim proceeds administratively will be recorded in subsequent orders and filings tied to the ongoing litigation.