- This topic has 1 reply, 2 voices, and was last updated 8 years ago by
.
- Posts
Hi Mike,
in the case with the children and the council boat, would the council have been found negligent if adults (instead of children) had been fixing the boat?
same with the poison berries in the park, what if adults had eaten them?
or would the concepts of ‘volenti’, ‘clean hands’ (touching someone else’s boat) etc have nillified negligence on the council’s behalf?
if the boat was rotten, could this be put down to the weather, instead of the council? also, would not the original boat owner be liable, and not the council?
“would not the original boat owner be liable” – how do you find the original owner? It’s not like a boat has number plates!
The council should have realised that an abandoned boat on their property was effectively an open invitation for children to play around (I know I did similar when I was a child!)
Adults would have more sense and would (probably) have realised that the boat fabric was rotten and therefore insecure … but you can’t expect that level of cognisance from children and the council should have realised that
OK?
- The topic ‘remoteness of foreseeability’ is closed to new replies.