Liability of bar owners for drunk drivers?

aphex™

Fellow student/ mate of mine works security in my college from time to time to earn a bit of extra dosh.

Apparently he is not allowed to let people drive home if they've been in the bar drinking.. not for ethical reasons but the fact that the college would be liable if they had a crash. He has to watch them like a hawk.

The bar is a good bit away from the gate so it is tough for him to see if they've been drinking etc.

Anyway, Is this true?

Eru

Not too my knowledge in Ireland. Australia has a law that supports bar liability for drunks and Irish law does make it illegal to serve drunks.

Lplated

Was an Irish case, about ten years ago, where a pub in North Cork (Mallow or nearby I think) was found liable in tort in circumstances where they had served a man who was already drunk who then went out and got involved in an accident.

I think the case may be confined to its own particular facts (meaning it is of little precedential value), and I don't think it was ever reported in the law reports but it may be available as unreported judgment.

Mortmain

I think that was the lighthouse taverns case. As far as I know, there was no tortious liability imposed on the ower of the bar (who actually drove the person in question to his car after serving him a number of beers) the case was actually settled out of court much to the disappointment of many in the legal profession. I believe that there was also another case, the name of which escapes me, about a lady who entered the premises intoxicated and proceeded to fall down the stairs in the pub. She was successful in a claim for negligence though i think there were other factors involved such as the light levels and general state of the premises. To date, the issue has yet to be resolved in this jurisdiction. Personally, i would like to see a greater degree of liability imposed, especially on proprietors who allow persons on to their premises, serve them and take their money until they are extremely drunk and then throw them out on to the streets to let them find their own way home. At the very least, such proprietors should be responsible for making sure these people arrive home safe and sound.

In relation to the original question, as far as I can see, it is likely that the bar in question is taking a preventative stance - fair dues to them.

dats_right

In reality, a plaintiff who has been injured by a drunk driver will pursue the drunk drivers insurance company or if they are uninsured or untraceable the Motor Insurance Bureau of Ireland.

Mortmain

dats_right wrote:

In reality, a plaintiff who has been injured by a drunk driver will pursue the drunk drivers insurance company or if they are uninsured or untraceable the Motor Insurance Bureau of Ireland.

Yup, but who can the drunk driver sue?

dermot_sheehan

Mortmain wrote:

Yup, but who can the drunk driver sue?

I would think that the chain of causation would be broken by the independent actions of a sane adult. In any case it could be argued that limiting liability would be justifiable based on policy reasons.

Mortmain

Roundabout taverns - that's the name of it. Gabhain7 some may say that there are equally justifiable policy reasons for imposing liability on publicans so they may be forced to act with a greater degree of social responsibility. Also, could it not be argued that the publican, by allowing the customer to get so intoxicated, in a way prevents the latter from acting in a reasonable manner. I'm of the opinion that the Roundabout Tavern wouldn't have settled the case if they didn't think they would lose??

Turner

At the moment a bar licensee or member of staff can be prosecuted for serving somebody who is intoxicated.

Mind you thats why many people go to the pub, to get drunk.

Lplated

Just to correct my post above, with thanks to Mortmain for jogging my memory. I think what happened was that the Drunk driver (DD) went into pub A, had a few drinks, left his car there, got a lift to pub B where he had a few more drinks. Then pub owner B drove him back to his car, which he got into and was involved in an accident around Banteer, Co.Cork.

The DD was severly injured (not sure about anyone else), unable to work for the rest of his life, young family to support etc.., so he sued pub B, on the basis that it had served him knowing he was drunk. When the case was called on a settlement was done by Pub B's insurers against Pub B's wishes and the public comment after arose because Pub B (and other interests) had wanted the case fully fought to establish that a publican would not be liable in those circumstances.

I think it would be an interesting case to see fought. Sure, a person goes into a bar and no-one 'forces' drink down them, nor does anyone force them to drive. But, in a case where they were involved in an accident, would the best result not be to have a heavy imposition of contributory negligence?

hullaballoo

I work in a bar on weekends and I generally stick to my own rules, irrespective of what the boss says. If someone is drunk, I don't serve them. If I reckon someone is driving, I won't serve them either. I also won't serve anyone after 11.30/12.30 when other staff might continue serving.

I'm just looking out for my own back, because I know I could be in trouble with the law if I break it. Plus, the manager/owner can't really say anything to me because you can't legally force someone to break the law.