He actually had to be operated 3 times and spent 12 weeks in hospital. The social security joined the suit asking for 26000 euros, which is the price it reimbursed for the medical operations, so it was not exactly benign.Rougerie, though, seems to have suffered no ongoing effects. On that basis, it's a dangerous precedent.
This said, I think it should probably have been settled some otherway, through insurances rather than such a lawsuit. In particular, I understand asking repair of the damage and treatment, but asking more for lack of match bonus and such seemed excessive. In fact, the court judged about 40000 euros of the 90000 asked by Rougerie.
A side note is that the player has been condemned along with his club (so the Wasps have to pay whether they want to or not).
The court judged this:
which means roughly:cette action est non seulement contraire à la réglementation du rugby qui interdit toute intervention au dessus des épaules mais dénote également une brutalité excessive et déloyale.
Il ne s'agit pas en effet d'un raffut (...) mais d'une véritable manchette traduisant un comportement dangereux
There may be consequences on rugby, but considering that the club was held liable, I don't think it will be that bad. If one club hurts another club's player, I don't think it's too bad to have the offender's club pay to heal the victim. Now I haven't seen the action (either that or it was 5 years ago and I forgot) so I don't know whether the hit was an agression or just something that can happen by accident.this action is not only contrary to rugby regulations which prevents tackling above shoulders but also denotes an excessive and unlawful brutality.
Indeed it is not a fend(...) but a real manchette(?forearm hit to the throat) translating a dangerous behaviour