Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Man slips on algae on steps going into the sea - awarded €60k

Options
  • 25-03-2014 10:26am
    #1
    Cienciano
    Registered Users Posts: 14,226 ✭✭✭✭


    Story:
    http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/man-awarded-59-050-over-slip-at-rush-pier-1.1729745
    Obviously a nasty injury, but does personal responsibility not exist anymore? It says Dublin City Council should have cleared the steps of seaweed, or installed a handrail. But they weren't there, but this guy still went ahead and used the facilities anyway. There's one person responsible for this injuries, and that's the guy himself.
    The judge should have said "tough shít, you fell. Next case"


«13

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    theteal
    Registered Users Posts: 7,593 ✭✭✭theteal


    Man slips on waters edge because it's slippy, who would have thunk the wet water's edge could be slippy???


  • Options
    #3
    Gatling
    Registered Users Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    Maybe we should set up a boards personal injuries club and see how many claims we can successfully make and share the pay out pots
    360_F_102352090_ie3kLjDIvgrT1sxVDknWCUh8PxgMYzM7.jpg




  • Options
    #4
    Guy:Incognito
    Registered Users Posts: 38,247 ✭✭✭✭Guy:Incognito


    There should be a wet floor sign in the sea


  • Options
    #5
    Uriel.
    Registered Users Posts: 8,061 ✭✭✭Uriel.


    The Council's big mistake here making any previous attempt to make safe the steps.

    Essentially, it was their recognition of a problem and acceptance of same by trying to implement a solution, that ultimately gave them responsibility (and in the end liability).

    Once again tort law in Ireland shows, don't try to fix a problem, you're better off doing nothing rather than trying to help.

    Well done courts, well done.


  • Options
    #6
    Mrs Garth Brooks
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,865 ✭✭✭Mrs Garth Brooks


    Could do with some money. Off down to the beach for the day. There's steps with no hand rail. I'll be coming home with two broken legs and two broken arms. Then sue the council. Sounds easy.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    martingriff
    Registered Users Posts: 10,685 ✭✭✭✭martingriff


    Uriel. wrote: »
    The Council's big mistake here making any previous attempt to make safe the steps.

    Essentially, it was their recognition of a problem and acceptance of same by trying to implement a solution, that ultimately gave them responsibility (and in the end liability).

    Once again tort law in Ireland shows, don't try to fix a problem, you're better off doing nothing rather than trying to help.

    Well done courts, well done.

    They don't even need to fix the problem if someone e-mail the correct people to the problem then the council/company whatever can be libel as they knew about the problem

    Edit: This should have been a case of Tough S$%t Paddy


  • Options
    #8
    Freddie Dodge
    Closed Accounts Posts: 194 ✭✭Freddie Dodge


    martingriff wrote: »
    They don't even need to fix the problem if someone e-mail the correct people to the problem then the council/company whatever can be libel as they knew about the problem

    Edit: This should have been a case of Tough S$%t Paddy

    I agree with most of your post, but how would libel law be involved ? :confused:


  • Options
    #9
    Cienciano
    Registered Users Posts: 14,226 ✭✭✭✭Cienciano


    When you hear of stupid annoying decisions big companies do, or insurance is given as the reason things are so expensive, it's because of courts awarding money out for stupid things like this.


  • Options
    #10
    the_syco
    Registered Users Posts: 37,295 ✭✭✭✭the_syco


    I can see a large fence being put up stopping anyone from ever using that stairs again!


  • Options
    #11
    whisky_galore
    Registered Users Posts: 15,746 ✭✭✭✭whisky_galore


    It would be cheaper for councils to close off these facilities rather than keep up the pretense of maintaining them, or stick up 'no liability' signs like you get in car parks if your car gets robbed.

    Getting back to 'personal responsibilty' when steps are covered in green sh!t it's fairly fcuking obvious that they're going to be VERY slippy, but he still goes ahead and nearly breaks his neck.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    kupus
    Registered Users Posts: 4,151 ✭✭✭kupus


    Cienciano wrote: »
    Story:
    http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/man-awarded-59-050-over-slip-at-rush-pier-1.1729745
    Obviously a nasty injury, but does personal responsibility not exist anymore? It says Dublin City Council should have cleared the steps of seaweed, or installed a handrail. But they weren't there, but this guy still went ahead and used the facilities anyway. There's one person responsible for this injuries, and that's the guy himself.
    The judge should have said "tough shít, you fell. Next case"

    If he said that and people had to take responsibility for themselves.... a lot of people would be out of jobs.

    Lawyers, court reporters, judges, it would be a total nightmare and society would come to a halt. Can you just imagine giving people personnel responsibility. *shudder* perish the thought.


  • Options
    #13
    Wossack
    Registered Users Posts: 7,000 ✭✭✭Wossack


    the_syco wrote: »
    I can see a large fence being put up stopping anyone from ever using that stairs again!

    until someone gets impaled trying to climb over them :pac:


  • Options
    #14
    Dempsey
    Registered Users Posts: 20,553 ✭✭✭✭Dempsey


    Whilst I think there should be more personal responsibility from people, I believe the council didnt do their job in this instance. Would that have prevented this injury, hard to know.


  • Options
    #15
    Cienciano
    Registered Users Posts: 14,226 ✭✭✭✭Cienciano


    whisky_galore wrote: »
    It would be cheaper for councils to close off these facilities rather than keep up the pretense of maintaining them.
    Exactly. Sort of reminds me of the no running in school playgrounds thing. It's easier just to stop people doing stuff rather than giving them responsibility for their actions


  • Options
    #16
    banie01
    Registered Users Posts: 16,475 ✭✭✭✭banie01


    martingriff wrote: »
    They don't even need to fix the problem if someone e-mail the correct people to the problem then the council/company whatever can be libel as they knew about the problem

    Edit: This should have been a case of Tough S$%t Paddy
    Freddie Dodge wrote: »
    I agree with most of your post, but how would libel law be involved ? :confused:

    I think perhaps Martingriff meant ''Liable'' rather than ''Libel'' ?


  • Options
    #17
    kupus
    Registered Users Posts: 4,151 ✭✭✭kupus


    Cienciano wrote: »
    Exactly. Sort of reminds me of the no running in school playgrounds thing. It's easier just to stop people doing stuff rather than giving them responsibility for their actions


    But but but someone has to think of the lawyers


  • Options
    #18
    calanus
    Registered Users Posts: 271 ✭✭calanus


    But... seaweed isn't exactly a hidden danger like for example you slipped on a wet floor. You may not have noticed it was wet and no sign was present to alert you to the danger. Seaweed is green/brown and grows on every hard surface it can found along the coast. If I slipped on something as obvious as this and broke my arm, I would be keeping the cause of the break very hush hush. Although 60k would be nice even if the country now knows that you're a dingus


  • Options
    #19
    whisky_galore
    Registered Users Posts: 15,746 ✭✭✭✭whisky_galore


    calanus wrote: »
    But... seaweed isn't exactly a hidden danger like for example you slipped on a wet floor. You may not have noticed it was wet and no sign was present to alert you to the danger. Seaweed is green/brown and grows on every hard surface it can found along the coast. If I slipped on something as obvious as this and broke my arm, I would be keeping the cause of the break very hush hush. Although 60k would be nice even if the country now knows that your a dingus

    Plus it's not as if he's a child and doesn't know what could potentially happen, but typical Ireland :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #20
    suicide_circus
    Registered Users Posts: 19,802 ✭✭✭✭suicide_circus


    we need to introduce once-off stupidity taxes. lump sums payable to revenue when you do something stupid and sue someone. the tax shall equal the amiunt paid in damages plus 10%.


  • Options
    #21
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,567 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    whisky_galore wrote: »
    It would be cheaper for councils to close off these facilities rather than keep up the pretense of maintaining them, or stick up 'no liability' signs like you get in car parks if your car gets robbed.

    No liability signs would be useless. You can not disclaim liability for negligence.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    Thud
    Registered Users Posts: 2,534 ✭✭✭Thud


    icy footpaths are next


  • Options
    #23
    martingriff
    Registered Users Posts: 10,685 ✭✭✭✭martingriff


    banie01 wrote: »
    I think perhaps Martingriff meant ''Liable'' rather than ''Libel'' ?

    Yep


  • Options
    #24
    Mountjoy Mugger
    Registered Users Posts: 4,486 ✭✭✭Mountjoy Mugger


    Cienciano wrote: »
    Story:
    http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/man-awarded-59-050-over-slip-at-rush-pier-1.1729745
    Obviously a nasty injury, but does personal responsibility not exist anymore? It says Dublin City Council should have cleared the steps of seaweed, or installed a handrail. But they weren't there, but this guy still went ahead and used the facilities anyway. There's one person responsible for this injuries, and that's the guy himself.
    The judge should have said "tough shít, you fell. Next case"

    Nothing to do with Dublin City Council. It was Fingal.


  • Options
    #25
    Muise...
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,512 ✭✭✭Muise...


    I presume the pier was built for boats, and the steps for embarking/disembarking at mid-low tide? Even on a warm summer evening, getting in and out of the sea three times would leave you fairly cold and more likely to slip than someone getting in/out of a boat with good boots on. Why should the Council have to pay for people adapting the pier for use as a swimming spot?


  • Options
    #26
    Firefox11
    Registered Users Posts: 1,515 ✭✭✭Firefox11


    Guy:Incognito wrote: »
    There should be a wet floor sign in the sea

    Or Something Like: CAUTION:SLIPPERY WHEN WET sign maybe?? :p


  • Options
    #27
    jackofalltrades
    Registered Users Posts: 3,235 ✭✭✭jackofalltrades


    Thud wrote: »
    icy footpaths are next
    It's already happened.
    http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/physiotherapist-awarded-1m-after-slip-on-icy-steps-30048928.html


  • Options
    #28
    RoboRat
    Registered Users Posts: 2,454 ✭✭✭RoboRat


    Walter White at it again


  • Options
    #29
    blaze1
    Registered Users Posts: 1,559 ✭✭✭blaze1


    Hope thats not for loss of earnings, €59k for 3 months work for a self employed barber! I'm in the wrong job!


  • Options
    #30
    Sleepy
    Registered Users Posts: 24,150 ✭✭✭✭Sleepy


    Can we not just pass a "common sense" law that gives Judges the right to over-ride existing laws when common sense dictates that they should do so?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    RoboRat
    Registered Users Posts: 2,454 ✭✭✭RoboRat


    On his third time descending the steps, the court was told Mr McGrath slipped on a moss-like marine plant and fell heavily on his elbow.

    So he went down TWICE before, not realising it was slippy? Did it just become slippy the third time he went down?

    Also, €60k, whats that about? I thought that they were limiting payouts. He broke his arm and was out of work for probably a month tops so the 'compensation' should equate to his revenue loss and medical expenses. This crap of giving these huge payouts is what encourages people to take these cases. Compensation is there to 'counterbalance or make up for an undesired state of affairs' therefore it should only equate to what is stated above and possibly a small figure for inconvenience.


Advertisement