From: | Andrew Tettenborn <a.m.tettenborn@swansea.ac.uk> |
To: | obligations@uwo.ca |
Date: | 12/03/2018 12:59:46 UTC |
Subject: | Mother as defendant |
Some of the most interesting tort cases are at bottom factual determinations, but none the less important for that. Does anyone share my misgivings at Whipple J's determination today on appeal that a parent who holds a child's birthday party at a crazy golf course should find herself personally liable to a child hit in the eye by a golf club because she didn't specifically instruct her child not to swing? Seems to me that it adds new terrors to parenthood, especially uninsured parenthood.
See The Bosworth Water Trust v SSR & Ors [2018] EWHC 444 (QB)
Andrew Tettenborn Professor of Commercial Law, Swansea University
Institute for International Shipping
and Trade Law
|
Andrew
Tettenborn Athro yn y Gyfraith Fasnachol, Prifysgol Abertawe
Sefydliad y
Gyfraith Llongau a Masnach Ryngwladol |
See us on Twitter: @swansea_dst
Read the IISTL Blog: iistl.wordpress.com
Read Andrew's other writing here
and
here
Disclaimer: This email (including any attachments) is for the use of the intended recipient only and may contain confidential information and/or copyright material. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and delete this email and all copies from your system. Any unauthorized use, disclosure, reproduction, copying, distribution, or other form of unauthorized dissemination of the contents is expressly prohibited. |