13.07.2015 Views

civil liability of good samaritans and volunteers - Law Reform ...

civil liability of good samaritans and volunteers - Law Reform ...

civil liability of good samaritans and volunteers - Law Reform ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

statutes go so far as to extend protection to the simple act <strong>of</strong> volunteering. TheCommission observes that Good Samaritan statutes may be seen as anattempt to eliminate the perceived inadequacies <strong>of</strong> the common law rule underwhich a Good Samaritan or volunteer who acts voluntarily for the benefit <strong>of</strong>society, by assisting an injured person or providing services to another, can beheld liable for failing to exercise reasonable care.4.14 The Commission emphasises that any Good Samaritan legislationproposed by the Commission must be clear. It must also <strong>of</strong>fer a coherent <strong>and</strong>comprehensive guide to Good Samaritans, voluntary rescuers <strong>and</strong> voluntaryservice providers as to their legal position.4.15 In the subsequent sections, the Commission examines the legislationthat applies to Good Samaritans <strong>and</strong> <strong>volunteers</strong> in other States. Drawing ontheir experience, the Commission identifies the type <strong>of</strong> legislation that is suitedto Irel<strong>and</strong>. The Commission notes at this stage that, where full immunity is notinvolved, these statutes <strong>of</strong>ten state that a Good Samaritan or volunteer is notrequired to comply with the normal st<strong>and</strong>ard <strong>of</strong> negligence but is only to be heldliable where gross negligence is established. The Commission considerswhether this st<strong>and</strong>ard should be applied to Good Samaritans, <strong>volunteers</strong> <strong>and</strong>volunteer organisations in Irel<strong>and</strong> or whether the current st<strong>and</strong>ard <strong>of</strong> ordinarynegligence is more appropriate. An underlying objective in this is to strike anacceptable balance between the need to afford protection to Good Samaritans<strong>and</strong> <strong>volunteers</strong> <strong>and</strong> an injured person‟s legitimate interest to seek redress forinjury or harm.(2) Good Samaritan Legislation in other Jurisdictions(a)Introduction4.16 In this section, the Commission examines the scope <strong>of</strong> GoodSamaritan statutes in other comparable common law jurisdictions to determinetheir relevance to the proposed legislation in this State. The Commissionobserves that most common law jurisdictions have adopted either GoodSamaritan or volunteer legislation, if not both. The Commission notes,however, that there is no generally accepted formula for the creation <strong>of</strong> suchlegislation <strong>and</strong> that legislation differs greatly from jurisdiction to jurisdiction.(b)United States4.17 Every State in the United States has enacted some form <strong>of</strong> GoodSamaritan legislation. 17 Much <strong>of</strong> this legislation protects from litigation to thosewho assist in emergencies. This protection is usually predicated on the17See Eric A. Br<strong>and</strong>t, Comment: Good Samaritan <strong>Law</strong>s – The Legal Placebo: ACurrent Analysis 17 Akron L. Rev. 3030-303 (1983) for an overview.90

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!