Add Your Idea

Stop good casues getting sued by using a lower gross negligence standard.

Comment 18th July 2010

Organisations or actvities that are:

  1. For recreational purposes
  2. Environmentally benefitcial
  3. Conducted by the voluntary sector

Should be held to a lower standard of gross negligence (much more difficult to prove, but well understood and defined by the criminal law already), so they cannot easily get sued. This would encourage more socially beneficial activities and greater freedom, without people worrying about being sued when they're trying to have fun, help others out or help the environment.

Why does this matter?

Bascally, people are petrified to do anything nice in their community, because if it goes wrong, they get sued for crazy amounts by ambulance-chasing lawyers.

The result? No communities and a minimal voluntary sector that can only survive through state support. It also means very limited activities for children. Take the followeing eg's all of which could be fixed by lower regulation:

  1. Children aren't allowed to make daisy chains because of hygiene risk.
  2. Off-duty doctors are scared to help injured people because they might get sued if they do something wrong.
  3. Councils chop down beautiful tree-lined avenues because they don't want to be sued if a branch falls.
  4. Village fetes and chairties cannot do cake-bakes to raise money in case someone gets food poisoning. Because they cannot guarantee the premises meet the required standards.

…it really is a sad world  

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)

Highlighted posts


Comment on this idea

Good idea? Bad idea? Let us know your thoughts.


Back to top
Add Your Idea