Australian Politics Forum - If ya stuff up.....

Aussie Gold Member Offline OzPolitic Posts: 39229 Gender:	If ya stuff up..... May 10^th, 2015 at 1:27pm It is quite usual that if someone stuffs up and another incurs a loss (including property or financial) as a direct consequence of that stuff up, then the person/company whatever which is responsible for the stuff up ought make good that loss, yeas? Anyone disagree with that concept.....if you stuff up directly causing loss......you pay?
Back to top	IP Logged

John_Taverner

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2212
Gender: male

Re: If ya stuff up.....
Reply #1 - May 10^th, 2015 at 1:39pm

Aussie wrote on May 10^th, 2015 at 1:27pm:

It is quite usual that if someone stuffs up and another incurs a loss (including property or financial) as a direct consequence of that stuff up, then the person/company whatever which is responsible for the stuff up ought make good that loss, yeas?

Anyone disagree with that concept.....if you stuff up directly causing loss......you pay?

- or your indemnity insurance pays.

If somebody built a house in front of yours blocking out your sea view, that would cause the other party to incur a loss (reduced asset valuation), but I doubt if there would be any legal recourse. What you perceive as a stuff-up may not be the same perception as others.

Back to top

IP Logged

Aussie

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 39229
Gender: male

Re: If ya stuff up.....
Reply #2 - May 10^th, 2015 at 1:45pm

John_Taverner wrote on May 10^th, 2015 at 1:39pm:

Aussie wrote on May 10^th, 2015 at 1:27pm:

It is quite usual that if someone stuffs up and another incurs a loss (including property or financial) as a direct consequence of that stuff up, then the person/company whatever which is responsible for the stuff up ought make good that loss, yeas?

Anyone disagree with that concept.....if you stuff up directly causing loss......you pay?

- or your indemnity insurance pays.

If somebody built a house in front of yours blocking out your sea view, that would cause the other party to incur a loss (reduced asset valuation), but I doubt if there would be any legal recourse. What you perceive as a stuff-up may not be the same perception as others.

'Stuff up' in the sense of negligence,or breach of duty, including even statutory duty in some instances.

Back to top

IP Logged

John_Taverner Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 2212 Gender:	Re: If ya stuff up..... Reply #3 - May 10^th, 2015 at 1:51pm It should depend on the circumstances. For example if a restaurant has a slippery floor and a customer slips and falls breaking her leg in the process, would that be a "stuff up" on the part of the restaurant? I think it depends a lot on legal precedent.
Back to top	IP Logged

Aussie

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 39229
Gender: male

Re: If ya stuff up.....
Reply #4 - May 10^th, 2015 at 1:58pm

John_Taverner wrote on May 10^th, 2015 at 1:51pm:

It should depend on the circumstances. For example if a restaurant has a slippery floor and a customer slips and falls breaking her leg in the process, would that be a "stuff up" on the part of the restaurant?

I think it depends a lot on legal precedent.

Of course it is a stuff up and the person/entity responsible ought make right any direct loss, yeas? Forget the Law.....use common sense.

Back to top

IP Logged

Resolute Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 730	Re: If ya stuff up..... Reply #5 - May 10^th, 2015 at 2:02pm Most if not all "stuff ups" as you call them are covered by insurance, if of course it is a business open to the public. Business to business usually have specialist insurance mainly directed at negligence or efficacy. Yeas....?
Back to top	Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. Winston Churchill IP Logged

John_Taverner

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2212
Gender: male

Re: If ya stuff up.....
Reply #6 - May 10^th, 2015 at 2:02pm

Aussie wrote on May 10^th, 2015 at 1:58pm:

John_Taverner wrote on May 10^th, 2015 at 1:51pm:

It should depend on the circumstances. For example if a restaurant has a slippery floor and a customer slips and falls breaking her leg in the process, would that be a "stuff up" on the part of the restaurant?

I think it depends a lot on legal precedent.

Of course it is a stuff up and the person/entity responsible ought make right any direct loss, yeas? Forget the Law.....use common sense.

Ok your honour. So the girl involved just had an argument with her boyfriend and threw her drink at him. She then stormed out, slipping on her own drink on the floor, broke her leg, and sued the restaurant chain for damages.

It's a real case from the US. Nothing is ever totally clear cut.

Now she probably had the greatest proportion of blame, but the restaurant chain had some blame apportioned, so they had to fork out. Grin

Back to top

IP Logged

Aussie

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 39229
Gender: male

Re: If ya stuff up.....
Reply #7 - May 10^th, 2015 at 2:05pm

John_Taverner wrote on May 10^th, 2015 at 2:02pm:

Aussie wrote on May 10^th, 2015 at 1:58pm:

John_Taverner wrote on May 10^th, 2015 at 1:51pm:

It should depend on the circumstances. For example if a restaurant has a slippery floor and a customer slips and falls breaking her leg in the process, would that be a "stuff up" on the part of the restaurant?

I think it depends a lot on legal precedent.

Of course it is a stuff up and the person/entity responsible ought make right any direct loss, yeas? Forget the Law.....use common sense.

Ok your honour. So the girl involved just had an argument with her boyfriend and threw her drink at him. She then stormed out, slipping on her own drink on the floor, broke her leg, and sued the restaurant chain for damages.

It's a real case from the US. Nothing is ever totally clear cut.

Now she probably had the greatest proportion of blame, but the restaurant chain had some blame apportioned, so they had to fork out. Grin

She stuffed up....she copped the consequences. That is the simple question. If you stuff up, you cop the consequences, including those you cause for yourself. Agree?

Back to top

IP Logged

Resolute Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 730	Re: If ya stuff up..... Reply #8 - May 10^th, 2015 at 2:09pm In the case of the spilt drink, the girl is contributory in the negligence, whilst the restaurant is negligent in not cleaning the spill up before anybody slipped. 50/50
Back to top	Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. Winston Churchill IP Logged

John_Taverner

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2212
Gender: male

Re: If ya stuff up.....
Reply #9 - May 10^th, 2015 at 2:14pm

Another case:
Quote:

A San Carlos, California, man sued the Escondido Public Library for $1.5 million. His dog, a 50-pound Labrador mix, was attacked November 2000 by the library's 12-pound feline mascot, L.C., (also known as Library Cat). The case was heard in January 2004, with the jury finding for the defendant. In a further case which was resolved in July 2004, the plaintiff in the previous suit was ordered to pay the city $29,362.50, which amounted to 75% of its legal fees associated with that case.

Back to top

IP Logged

Svengali Gold Member Offline Please don't thank me Posts: 3474 Gender:	Re: If ya stuff up..... Reply #10 - May 10^th, 2015 at 2:17pm The expression 'stuff up' lacks legal definition. Negligence is already actionable under common law.
Back to top	We first fought the heathens in the name of religion, then Communism, and now in the name of drugs and terrorism. Our excuses for global domination always change. Serj Tankian IP Logged

Aussie

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 39229
Gender: male

Re: If ya stuff up.....
Reply #11 - May 10^th, 2015 at 2:22pm

Svengali wrote on May 10^th, 2015 at 2:17pm:

The expression 'stuff up' lacks legal definition. Negligence is already actionable under common law.

If I wanted to go all technical legal 'n stuff I could, but that is not the exercise. We'd start at the beginning with Donoghue -v- Stevenson, and march through to Rylands -v- Fletcher and on we'd go. But...........

Does anyone disagree with the basic common sense proposition that if you stuff up and that stuff up causes loss, you ought make up the loss?

Back to top

IP Logged

Aussie Gold Member Offline OzPolitic Posts: 39229 Gender:	Re: If ya stuff up..... Reply #12 - May 10^th, 2015 at 2:24pm Cods, melielongtime, AP, aquascoot etc......where are you?
Back to top	IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: If ya stuff up.....
Reply #13 - May 10^th, 2015 at 2:26pm

Aussie wrote on May 10^th, 2015 at 1:27pm:

It is quite usual that if someone stuffs up and another incurs a loss (including property or financial) as a direct consequence of that stuff up, then the person/company whatever which is responsible for the stuff up ought make good that loss, yeas?

Anyone disagree with that concept.....if you stuff up directly causing loss......you pay?

not entirely. It depends on the circumstance. Some people are responsible for vast sums of money in equipment and materials. Should they have to pay for loss in the event of a 'stuff up'? No. (presuming it was not criminal negligence)

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: If ya stuff up.....
Reply #14 - May 10^th, 2015 at 2:28pm

Aussie wrote on May 10^th, 2015 at 1:58pm:

John_Taverner wrote on May 10^th, 2015 at 1:51pm:

It should depend on the circumstances. For example if a restaurant has a slippery floor and a customer slips and falls breaking her leg in the process, would that be a "stuff up" on the part of the restaurant?

I think it depends a lot on legal precedent.

Of course it is a stuff up and the person/entity responsible ought make right any direct loss, yeas? Forget the Law.....use common sense.

and you wonder why we doubt your claim to having been a lawyer!

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged