Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 20:51:55 +0100

From: Robert Stevens

Subject: Childs v. Desormeaux

I admit that I think that goes too far. I can see an argument for saying that a host has assumed responsibility towards his guests, and that when they are so drunk as to be unable to make rational decisions he owes them a duty of care to stop serving. I didn't think that that was our hypothetical however.

Robert Stevens
Barrister
University of Oxford

Lewis KLAR writes:

In Canada, commercial hosts can be and have been found liable to their patrons for injuries caused to themselves when they drunkenly drive home. It is not "their lookout". The first Canadian case back in the early 1970's was in fact between the drunk patron and the bar which served him for injuries which he suffered while going home (was hit by a car while staggering along road). I am not sure if Robert Stevens was referring only to social hosts when he suggested the opposite.

<<<< Previous Message  ~  Index  ~  Next Message >>>>>