From: | Andrew Dickinson <andrew.dickinson@sydney.edu.au> |
To: | Donald Macdonald <d.r.macdonald@dundee.ac.uk> |
obligations@uwo.ca | |
Date: | 16/12/2011 12:33:07 UTC |
Subject: | RE: Santa guilty of negligence? |
Ross
Is this idea of Santa as a legal fiction specific to Scots law, and intended to avoid evidential difficulties? In
Best wishes
Andrew
From: Donald Macdonald
[mailto:d.r.macdonald@dundee.ac.uk]
Sent: 16 December 2011 10:35
To:
Subject: Re: Santa guilty of negligence?
Careful analysis shows that Santa apparently only has one elf, something which can only be possible since the
Ross Macdonald
************************************************************
Please consider the environment. Do you really need to print this email?
>>>
On 14 December 2011, the Court of Appeal in an
ex tempore judgment (Ducasse v Melbry Events) held that Santa and/or one of his Elves had been negligent in failing to spot an icicle on the floor of his grotto over
which the claimant tripped, causing a leg injury. The defendant operator of the grotto (no doubt, a corporate device used by St Nick to protect North Pole assets from seizure in execution) was held to have breached its occupier’s duty of care. From a Lawtel
summary of the decision, it appears that the Court was impressed with the safety system used by Santa and the Elf (which had required Santa to check for debris from his throne), but concluded that it was possible that Santa and the Elf were not as careful
in the taking of precautions as they should have been.
So, after his success in Miracle on
Happy Christmas to all list members.
Best wishes
Andrew
ANDREW DICKINSON | Professor in Private International Law
Faculty of Law
THE
F10 - The New
T +61 2 9351 0240 (Sydney) / +44 1206 398114 (UK) | F +61 2 9351 0200
E
andrew.dickinson@sydney.edu.au
| W http://sydney.edu.au/law
The