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

Hill walker award overturned

Options

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    nhunter100
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,990 ✭✭✭nhunter100


    ThebitterLemon wrote:
    Seems like the sensible decision


    Crazy that an award was made in the first place.


  • Options
    #3
    FAILSAFE 00
    Registered Users Posts: 5,416 ✭✭✭FAILSAFE 00


    Well done to this judge. A win for common sense.

    I hope she has to pay their legal expenses.


  • Options
    #4
    Djoucer
    Closed Accounts Posts: 620 ✭✭✭Djoucer


    I have sympathy for her. Judge said she genuine and it was a serious enough injury.

    Some of the boardwalk is lethal in parts and is best avoided. Fair to say you are more likely to injure yourself on the boardwalk than anywhere else.

    If anything, she's done hikers a service by bringing clarity to the issue.


  • Options
    #5
    jameshayes
    Registered Users Posts: 3,772 ✭✭✭jameshayes


    Djoucer wrote: »
    I have sympathy for her. Judge said she genuine and it was a serious enough injury.

    Some of the boardwalk is lethal in parts and is best avoided. Fair to say you are more likely to injure yourself on the boardwalk than anywhere else.

    If anything, she's done hikers a service by bringing clarity to the issue.

    Just because someone lays a path for you doesn't mean you need to walk it - I mean that in a philosophical sense as well as a literal one. You have to weight up situations and if they are dangerous, proceed with caution or turn back. No one had a gun and made her walk the route.


  • Options
    #6
    ThisRegard
    Closed Accounts Posts: 27,834 ✭✭✭✭ThisRegard


    FAILSAFE 00 wrote: »
    I hope she has to pay their legal expenses.

    I doubt they'll be awarded against her, or looked for by the state. It's a case than can now be used as case law for any subsequent claims of the same nature so was beneficial to the state.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Afaik the appeal succeeded on the basis that, in this particular instance, there was no proof of negligence. There was no change in the general rule that a landowner may be liable to recreational users.


Advertisement