Paid for your own stupidity..

woodoo · 01-03-2014 04:04PM #1

What is going on with people suing and getting big payouts for their own stupidity these days? This bimbo climbed a closed gate and when she fell and injured herself sued and got €75,000. How is that anyone's fault but her own. Do people need signs and instructions for everything they do now. I suppose we are all paying for this through our insurance premiums.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/concertgoer-gets-75000-after-impaling-arm-on-spike-of-gate-30051915.html

Is there no such thing as personable responsibility and common sense.

shedweller · 01-03-2014 04:14PM

Solicitors.

wendell borton · 01-03-2014 04:15PM

I propose implementing the policy of "sh:t happens" in law.

michael999999 · 01-03-2014 04:16PM

wendell borton wrote: »

I propose implementing the policy of "sh:t happens" in law.

Or stupidity happens.

The Diabolical Monocle · 01-03-2014 04:16PM

The law has been too lazy in not bothering to make differentiation's.

They're inventive when they want to be. They're cynical and pedantic when they deem it necessary.

Cases like this should be separated into a troll bucket and involve a jury.

The civil court of buffoonery asshat-ery and public tomfoolery.

jane82 · 01-03-2014 04:18PM

Ah come off it you cant be having 80 000 or so drunk people over and have spikey fences. Its common sense somebody drunk will try climb it.
Trying to save money by using dangerous barriers gets you sued eventually.

blaze1 · 01-03-2014 04:19PM

Sure why hold yourself accountable when you can blame other people for your own stupid actions!

4m High! seriously, judge needs to cop the fcuk on IMHO

Borderfox · 01-03-2014 04:19PM

The article in the indo is a thinly veiled " I was in the vip section "

Who took the case Lionel Hutz?

Pumpkinseeds · 01-03-2014 04:20PM

So she trespassed in an area she shouldn't have been in, then climbed a ridiculously high security gate and injures herself, yeah we really need to reward stupidity. Of course she knew she was going to get a large award or she wouldn't have flown back from Australia:rolleyes: We can only hope a shark gets her.

Sir Arthur Daley · 01-03-2014 04:20PM

They should build them in concrete, concrete built is better built.

The Aussie · 01-03-2014 04:21PM

wendell borton wrote: »

I propose implementing the policy of "sh:t happens" in law.

I had someone run into me 2 years ago and they tried to say "it was an act of God", hilarity ensued when I asked him if his god was stupid and made him drive to fast for conditions...

He would have been better off with a "SH!T happens" law.

The Aussie · 01-03-2014 04:27PM

Pumpkinseeds wrote: »

Of course she knew she was going to get a large award or she wouldn't have flown back from Australia:rolleyes: We can only hope a shark gets her.

Or a Dingo eats her

just kidding

Ahoy Ahoy · 01-03-2014 04:33PM

The world we live in unfortunately!!!!!! It was her own fault for been so stupid

dxhound2005 · 01-03-2014 04:40PM

The Diabolical Monocle wrote: »

The law has been too lazy in not bothering to make differentiation's.

They're inventive when they want to be. They're cynical and pedantic when they deem it necessary.

Cases like this should be separated into a troll bucket and involve a jury.

The civil court of buffoonery asshat-ery and public tomfoolery.

If you had been on a jury for this case you would have given her nothing. But how do you know what other members of the jury would have decided? The highest damages by far have been awarded in cases where there was a jury.

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/justice/courts_system/high_court.html

In certain civil cases, such as defamation, assault and false imprisonment, a judge will sit with a jury in the High Court. In all cases, a majority vote of nine of the twelve jurors is sufficient to determine the verdict.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1330503/Naked-sleepwalker-wins-Jury-grants-Donal-Kinsella-record-8-5m-payout.html

Even the judge was taken aback when a jury awarded €10million (£8.51million) to a company boss who sleepwalked naked to a female colleague's bedroom.

woodoo · 01-03-2014 04:55PM

The Diabolical Monocle wrote: »

Cases like this should be separated into a troll bucket and involve a jury.

Yeah have a day where all those cases are before a jury and let the jury decide if people are acting the goat.

darkpagandeath · 01-03-2014 05:01PM

Something something legal system........

coolbeans · 01-03-2014 05:01PM

quote="jane82;89250637"]Ah come off it you cant be having 80 000 or so drunk people over and have spikey fences. Its common sense somebody drunk will try climb it.
Trying to save money by using dangerous barriers gets you sued eventually.[/quote]

Come off it yourself. Not everyone was drunk and those who were are responsible for their actions. Being in a state of inebriation doesn't give you a free pass for being an idiot. So ****ing tired of this nauseating Irish attitude towards alcohol and personal responsibility.

Peregrine · 01-03-2014 05:07PM

jane82 wrote: »

Trying to save money by using dangerous barriers gets you sued eventually.

How were they trying to save money?

jane82 · 01-03-2014 05:08PM

coolbeans wrote: »

quote="jane82;89250637"]Ah come off it you cant be having 80 000 or so drunk people over and have spikey fences. Its common sense somebody drunk will try climb it.
Trying to save money by using dangerous barriers gets you sued eventually.

Come off it yourself. Not everyone was drunk and those who were are responsible for their actions. Being in a state of inebriation doesn't give you a free pass for being an idiot. So ****ing tired of this nauseating Irish attitude towards alcohol and personal responsibility.[/quote]
If you are organising an event and put a bar on with 80 000 people you do a risk assessment. In any country in the world 80 000 people coming together where drink is being served will result in some drunkenness.
Why is there spikrs on the gate? To injure people trying to climb over. If concert organisers had a man with a shotgun shooting people climbing over itd be terrible but its ok here for them to stick steel spikes in them according to the people here.
If they paid 200 euro to have a big strong man removing the fence climbers instead of spikes they would have saved a substantial sum of money.

darkpagandeath · 01-03-2014 05:14PM

If you are organising an event and put a bar on with 80 000 people you do a risk assessment. In any country in the world 80 000 people coming together where drink is being served will result in some drunkenness.
Why is there spikrs on the gate? To injure people trying to climb over. If concert organisers had a man with a shotgun shooting people climbing over itd be terrible but its ok here for them to stick steel spikes in them according to the people here.
If they paid 200 euro to have a big strong man removing the fence climbers instead of spikes they would have saved a substantial sum of money.

How tall was the fence again ..... Risk assessments don't cover and should not cover idiots.... It's like boarding a plane from the outside the terminal. Why the barriers around the engines ? If you want to walk into an engine be my guest it's called natural selection. Your personal safety is not everyone's else's responsibility.

woodoo · 01-03-2014 05:15PM

jane82 wrote: »

If you are organising an event and put a bar on with 80 000 people you do a risk assessment. In any country in the world 80 000 people coming together where drink is being served will result in some drunkenness.
Why is there spikrs on the gate? To injure people trying to climb over. If concert organisers had a man with a shotgun shooting people climbing over itd be terrible but its ok here for them to stick steel spikes in them according to the people here.
If they paid 200 euro to have a big strong man removing the fence climbers instead of spikes they would have saved a substantial sum of money.

Some things just shouldn't need telling. And people climbing a 4 meter fence is one of them. What else should they be advised on.. not to jump and land their head on the hard ground. Not to jump of a height and break their leg.

coolbeans · 01-03-2014 05:19PM

jane82 wrote: »

Come off it yourself. Not everyone was drunk and those who were are responsible for their actions. Being in a state of inebriation doesn't give you a free pass for being an idiot. So ****ing tired of this nauseating Irish attitude towards alcohol and personal responsibility.

If you are organising an event and put a bar on with 80 000 people you do a risk assessment. In any country in the world 80 000 people coming together where drink is being served will result in some drunkenness.
Why is there spikrs on the gate? To injure people trying to climb over. If concert organisers had a man with a shotgun shooting people climbing over itd be terrible but its ok here for them to stick steel spikes in them according to the people here.
If they paid 200 euro to have a big strong man removing the fence climbers instead of spikes they would have saved a substantial sum of money.[/quote]

You're generally correct in what you say as regards requirements but in my benevolent dictatorship nobody should pay for that girl's stupidity but herself. I think it's fundamentally wrong to absolve people of their responsibility in this way and I've seen far too many cases of this type in Ireland to change my mind.

jane82 · 01-03-2014 05:20PM

People are saying the fence was 4 metres so having spikes on it shouldnt matter.
Why have the spikes then. Very few people could climb a 4 metre fence. One security man could have been better than spikes at 200 euro a day. That is why Id imagine she won the award.
Sure lets give the police spikes and if anybody fails to do what their told they can use them.

darkpagandeath · 01-03-2014 05:23PM

jane82 wrote: »

People are saying the fence was 4 metres so having spikes on it shouldnt matter.
Why have the spikes then. Very few people could climb a 4 metre fence. One security man could have been better than spikes at 200 euro a day. That is why Id imagine she won the award.
Sure lets give the police spikes and if anybody fails to do what their told they can use them.

4 metres without spikes and she falls off it ? should she get compo as well ? No. Spikes were not the problem.

dxhound2005 · 01-03-2014 05:24PM

jane82 wrote: »

People are saying the fence was 4 metres so having spikes on it shouldnt matter.
Why have the spikes then. Very few people could climb a 4 metre fence. One security man could have been better than spikes at 200 euro a day. That is why Id imagine she won the award.
Sure lets give the police spikes and if anybody fails to do what their told they can use them.

You shouldn't have to ask why it was a spiked gate if you read the story in the link.

The judge apportioned blame to Ms McCormack of 20pc for the accident after she climbed the four-metre high gate with spikes on top of it. The court heard the gate was originally designed to keep knights and soldiers out of the grounds during wartime.

jane82 · 01-03-2014 05:30PM

dxhound2005 wrote: »

You shouldn't have to ask why it was a spiked gate if you read the story in the link.

The judge apportioned blame to Ms McCormack of 20pc for the accident after she climbed the four-metre high gate with spikes on top of it. The court heard the gate was originally designed to keep knights and soldiers out of the grounds during wartime.

They should have been made safe so before it was deemed to charge 80 000 people for being there.

Peregrine · 01-03-2014 05:30PM

jane82 wrote: »

Why is there spikrs on the gate? To injure people trying to climb over. If concert organisers had a man with a shotgun shooting people climbing over itd be terrible but its ok here for them to stick steel spikes in them according to the people here.

jane82 wrote: »

Trying to save money by using dangerous barriers gets you sued eventually.

jane82 wrote: »

People are saying the fence was 4 metres so having spikes on it shouldnt matter.
Why have the spikes then. Very few people could climb a 4 metre fence. One security man could have been better than spikes at 200 euro a day. That is why Id imagine she won the award.
Sure lets give the police spikes and if anybody fails to do what their told they can use them.

Did you even read the article? Or at least the first line of it?

It's a feckin castle.

It even says this:

The court heard the gate was originally designed to keep knights and soldiers out of the grounds during wartime.

jane82 wrote: »

If they paid 200 euro to have a big strong man removing the fence climbers instead of spikes they would have saved a substantial sum of money.

You're not mad about preserving 18th century sites, are you?

coolbeans · 01-03-2014 05:30PM

darkpagandeath wrote: »

4 metres without spikes and she falls off it ? should she get compo as well ? No. Spikes were not the problem.

Being a dopey, shameless, grasping, irresponsible drunk was the problem.

coolbeans · 01-03-2014 05:33PM

jane82 wrote: »

They should have been made safe so before it was deemed to charge 80 000 people for being there.

They were plenty safe. They were four mètres off the ground. What more do you want? Padding? Hi-vis?

Sir Humphrey Appleby · 01-03-2014 05:33PM

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Spikes were not the problem.

Correct.
The problem was a failure by the organizers to meet their legal duty of care.
A mistake I doubt they will make again.

woodoo · 01-03-2014 05:35PM

jane82 wrote: »

People are saying the fence was 4 metres so having spikes on it shouldnt matter.
Why have the spikes then. Very few people could climb a 4 metre fence. One security man could have been better than spikes at 200 euro a day. That is why Id imagine she won the award.
Sure lets give the police spikes and if anybody fails to do what their told they can use them.

I can only assume you know this girl personally.

Paid for your own stupidity..

Comments