My understanding (it is always difficult to know for a non lawyer what precisely the law says as report on applications tend to be done by parties having a vested interest and hiding relevant facts which would weaken their position) is that in general liability waivers in France are in the same situation, not considered as valid and potentially considered by the legal system as a hint that the party asking the other to waive their right knows beforehand that they are doing something they shouldn't done or avoiding to take precautions that they should take.
Scuba "Buddy" Release form - Has anyone come across one?
- Thread starter GreggScott
- Start date
Please register or login
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
- Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
- A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
- You can make this box go away
My understanding (it is always difficult to know for a non lawyer what precisely the law says as report on applications tend to be done by parties having a vested interest and hiding relevant facts which would weaken their position) is that in general liability waivers in France are in the same situation, not considered as valid and potentially considered by the legal system as a hint that the party asking the other to waive their right knows beforehand that they are doing something they shouldn't done or avoiding to take precautions that they should take.
My understanding is that the waiver does offer some protection to the instructor--protection from what would essentially be nuisance lawsuits for events that are commonly considered normal dangers of scuba . It does not protect against true negligence, etc.
chrisch
Contributor
Part of the problem is the legal status of "negligence". In UK law this is a 'tort' A tort is a civil wrong not a criminal offence. Criminal negligence is the next stage up. So (at least here) there are two types of "negligence". This is pretty much the same in France derived from the principle of 'non-cumul des responsabilites'.
In the USA the system is slightly different (and not something I know much about) but the principle is the same.
Under UK law you cannot sign away your rights (unfair contract terms IIRC). Don't know about other places - sorry.
In general throughout the world it is harder and more strict to prove a criminal offence than a civil one. (OJ Simpson for example)
Civil law requires a lawyer to "make a claim" if you like and that person or company will charge a fee. (Most places you can do it yourself but it requires a lot of knowledge). So it works where there are "no win no fee" contracts. Most lawyers will underwrite that with insurance. So the insurance companies set the standards. No wonder no one really has a clue with so many interested parties.
Diving instructors tend to be taught by the agencies that they should get the trainee to sign the form but the instructor almost certainly has no legal knowledge. If the agency says get this paperwork the intrructor will get the paperwork. The trainee knows nothing better and signs it. Please please please lets not extend this utter BS to buddies......
mbs
Contributor
No one but Gabe Wilson knows what actually happened in that incident. He was eventually cleared of criminal charges by a US court due to lack of evidence but at the time there were allegations of homicide.
Tina Watson: the bride who drowned at the Barrier Reef
Kneeling before a freshly dug, unmarked grave at Southern Heritage Cemetery in Birmingham, Alabama, is a tall, thickset young man with dark hair and an oval, expressionless face. He is reading the
www.thetimes.com
Honeymoon man cleared of murdering wife in scuba dive
www.standard.co.uk
OMyMyOHellYes
Contributor
If by that, you mean there are some lawyers that got their bar card out of a Cracker Jack box and think they can find 1) a party with deep pockets (or a big enough insurance policy) and 2) they can dream or scheme any aspersion of anything towards the party mentioned in 1) - rightly, wrongly or who cares - and 3) they can be a big enough pain in the tookus so they will offer to "settle" (pay me to go away), .... Their "aggrieved client," well, they are just the tool said attorney uses to get his foot in the plaintiff's door.
Then if that's what you meant by the USA civil legal system, you have a better understanding of the system than you lead on ...
Not only were their allegations, he was tried for it in Alabama. The case was so ridiculous the judge directed an acquittal immediately after the prosecution rested--no need for the defense to make its case. Much of the concern was based on misinformation that circulated after the incident. Some of the misinformation did indeed sound quite damning--if only it had been true.
It turned out he was simply grossly incompetent. He got out of doing the checkout dive on the theory that he was a highly qualified NASDS Rescue Diver, but IIRC, he really didn't even have enough time in the water to qualify for that certification. His new wife was certified by the same NASDS instructor, and the time it took was also suspiciously short.
The defense in the Alabama case never got to use the expert witnesses on hand to explain all of that. @clownfishsydney can give you more details if needed.
Similar threads
