In
Just writing this brings me to tears. I cannot help but feel sadness for everyone involved. Not just as a mother of young children, but because of the overwhelming sense of loss this case emotes.
The poor, poor parents. The grandfather that must live with this every day. And the people who saw this tragedy unfold.
The grandfather's evidence was that he did not know and could not have been expected to know that a window would be open. He said that he had no idea he was placing Chloe up against an open window because there were no warning signs and he could not distinguish between tinted glass and open-air because he was colourblind.
The grandfather was charged with negligent homicide and sentenced to three years' probation.
The parents meanwhile launched a claim in negligence against
The Judge ruled that the grandfather could have relied on his basic senses to realise the window was open and that given he leaned over a wooden railing to hold Chloe up, an ordinary person would have known of the danger. The Judge, therefore, found that the circumstances were not foreseeable to
The parents' legal team will be appealing this decision.
Whilst the laws pertaining to cruise ship accidents can be complex this case got me thinking about how a
That a child could fall out of an open window, or that any passenger could?
Does that change the duty of care?
How can a window that opens on the 11th deck not give rise to a foreseeable risk of injury?
Is the risk so obvious that no breach of duty could be found?
A harsh reminder that the law must remain objective and focus on the facts as they are known and their application to the relevant legislation.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
Ms
Mooloolaba
4557
Tel: 730580026
URL: www.schultzlaw.com.au
© Mondaq Ltd, 2021 - Tel. +44 (0)20 8544 8300 - http://www.mondaq.com, source