Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 06:36:49 -0600

From: Russell Brown

Subject: Article on apology provisions

British Columbia has also just adopted an "apology" provision - in fact, a whole statute, the "Apology Act".

The BC statute includes similar provisions to those set out in the NSW and UK legislation, but it also deals with insurance coverage, providing that an "apology" (which is excruciatingly defined) "does not, despite any wording to the contrary in any contract of insurance and despite any other enactment, void, impair or otherwise affect any insurance coverage that is available, or that would, but for the apology, be available, to the person in connection with that matter ...."

It also provides that "evidence of an apology made by or on behalf of a person in connection with any matter is not admissible in any proceeding and must not be referred to or disclosed to a court in any proceeding as evidence of the fault or liability of the person in connection with that matter." That seems to preclude not only the plaintiff testifying to the defendant's apology, but also the defendant from testifying to his/her own apology (which s/he might want to do in order, for example, to defeat a claim for punitive damages).

With best wishes,

Russ

>>> Neil Foster 08/14/06 1:11 AM >>>

In light of s 2 of the UK Compensation Act 2006 (and s 69 of the Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW)) you may be interested in the following article which provides a critique of US "apology" provisions and their utility in medical negligence claims.

Marlynn Wei (August 2006)
Doctors, Apologies, and the Law: An Analysis and Critique of Apology Laws

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