In article ,
"John Rowland" wrote:
"Mike D" wrote in message
...

Am I right in saying that you could be charged
with manslaughter if you 'Fail to offer reasonalbe
assistance' to someone in need.

No. Under English law, if you found Tony Blair hanging off the edge of a
cliff, you would be under no legal obligation to rescue him. I've checked.

But as we see on the news today Labour ministers do like to help out
rescuing other people in difficulties and it would be very rude not
to return the favour.

--
http://www.election.demon.co.uk
"The guilty party was the Liberal Democrats and they were hardened offenders,
and coded racism was again in evidence in leaflets distributed in September
1993." - Nigel Copsey, "Contemporary British Fascism", page 62.

David Boothroyd ) gurgled happily, sounding
much like they were saying :

But as we see on the news today Labour ministers do like to help out
rescuing other people in difficulties

Yeh, right. Prescott rescued him "with some assistance from his bodyguard".
Want to bet on the exact division of effort?

and it would be very rude not to return the favour.

Do you want to try to carry Prescott to the first aid point?

Following on from John Rowland's message. . .
No. Under English law, if you found Tony Blair hanging off the edge of a
cliff, you would be under no legal obligation to rescue him. I've checked.
Tough call...
....For TB.

a- Be rescued by 'two underpants' Prescott
or
b - end it all.

--
PETER (EDWIN known as PROF) FOX
Not the same since the submarine business went under

John Rowland wrote:

"Mike D" wrote in message
...

Am I right in saying that you could be charged
with manslaughter if you 'Fail to offer reasonalbe
assistance' to someone in need.

No. Under English law, if you found Tony Blair hanging off the edge of a
cliff, you would be under no legal obligation to rescue him. I've checked.

If you were responsible for him being there, then there is a duty of care;
were you to leave him there you could be sued for negligence in the breach
of that duty.

Further, I understand that if directed to help by a Police hofficer it would
be an offence to decline to do so.

But most of all were you not to aid the poor Vicar, you would certainly be
lynched by those of us who really, really don't want Blunketty Spunk
getting his hands on the tiller!
--
Al

[ aim: LGeezerAIM | jabber: | yahoo: LGeezer_YHO ]

"Mike D" wrote in message
...

Am I right in saying that you could be charged with manslaughter if you
'Fail to offer reasonalbe assistance' to someone in need. Obviously what
is
reasonable could be open to interpretation, but perhaps a visit from the
local Constabulary to the home of the LU manager to interview him might
shake him up a bit. Also a good case for naming and shaming I would have
thought (again the manager).


These days if you give first aid I understand that you can be held
liable.....

A plague on the compensation culture.

G

These days if you give first aid I understand that you can be held
liable.....

A plague on the compensation culture.

G



I did a law unit at college last year and this subject came up with our
lecturer giving the example of a road crash saying that I would be under
no obligation to help the injured person but if I did help them and made
their situation worse i.e paralysed them, then they would be perfectly
entitled to sue me even though I was only genuinely just trying to help.

As pointed out, with us becoming a more US style sue culture, if you do
meet someone dying then you have to consider your own position rather
than just automatically helping them which is a really sad indicator of
today's society.


Stephen

"Fearty" wrote in message
...

I did a law unit at college last year and this subject came up with our
lecturer giving the example of a road crash saying that I would be under
no obligation to help the injured person but if I did help them and made
their situation worse i.e paralysed them, then they would be perfectly
entitled to sue me even though I was only genuinely just trying to help.

Yes, that's exactly the same situation as reared its head with regard to
snow clearing, back in the 1970s. If it snows and you leave your front path
untouched and someone falls down they have no claim, if you've cleared it
and they slip over then you're liable. So much for trying to do a good turn!

Fearty wrote:

I did a law unit at college last year and this subject came up with our
lecturer giving the example of a road crash saying that I would be under
no obligation to help the injured person but if I did help them and made
their situation worse i.e paralysed them, then they would be perfectly
entitled to sue me even though I was only genuinely just trying to help.

FWIW, when I did a 1st aid course last year, I was assured that such
suits would fail as long as you had followed your training.

Doesn't help if you haven't had first aid training and want to help -
so get trained if you can.

Colin McKenzie

In article , Fearty
writes
if I did help them and made their situation worse i.e paralysed them,
then they would be perfectly entitled to sue me even though I was only
genuinely just trying to help.

As pointed out, with us becoming a more US style sue culture,

Much, if not all, of the US has a "Good Samaritan" law: if you were
genuinely attempting to give help in an emergency, you can't be sued for
the results of your actions.

--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home:
Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org
Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work:
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is:

On Mon, 16 Aug 2004 19:09:26 +0100 someone who may be "Gavin
Hamilton" wrote this:-

These days if you give first aid I understand that you can be held
liable.....

I suspect that has always been the case.



--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
prevents me using the RIP Act 2000.