Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ramrod
He won the case because the judge found that the company whose roof the boy fell through were negligent in not fixing a security fence, thus enabling the boy to trespass and hurt himself  |
It was a
security fence - i.e. intended to keep out thieves, not a
safety fence. Since it wasn't meant as protection of the safety of the public there should be no legal compulsion to have or maintain it.
Imagine a burglar breaking into your house, and breaks his ankle in the process.
Then he sues
you because you didn't have a burglar alarm, because if you had then he wouldn't have broken in and hurt his ankle.
I just hope that since the company is 'now defunct' (according to the article) that there is no-one to pay the damages...
Of course the precedent it sets is possibly worse than the payout it awarded.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ramrod
Not being judgemental here..............
|
No, nor me.