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

individuals alone and not organisations. In addition, a distinction betweenformal and informal volunteers is rarely, if ever, made.4.61 The Commission recommends, therefore, that while the legislationproposed should be broad enough to cover both individuals and organisations,it should draw a clear line between individuals and organisations, reflecting thevery different circumstances encountered by each. In this regard, theCommission recalls the discussion in Chapter 3 which illustrated the varyingdegrees to which individual Good Samaritans and volunteers and voluntaryorganisations might come under a duty of care. The Commission observedthat, taking into account the need to ensure that members of the public maintaina right to seek redress, it may be less just and reasonable to hold an individualaccountable for ordinary negligence than a voluntary organisation. In support ofthis, the Commission points to the extent to which voluntary organisations notonly create risk but also the extent to which they are in a position to absorbsuch risk. Given the organisational structure of a voluntary organisation and theduties that this of itself entails – which already includes statutory duties asemployer such as those under the Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Act2005, it is clear that an organisation is in a much stronger position to alleviatethe risk not only to itself and its volunteers, but also to those it assists. If thepublic‟s right to seek redress is to be acknowledged, it is better that liabilityshould apply to the voluntary organisation rather than the individual volunteer.The Commission therefore recommends that the legislation should distinguishbetween, on the one hand, the liability of individuals, and, on the other, theliability of organisations. The Commission notes that the definition of“undertaking” in the Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Act 2005 includes bothcorporate and unincorporated entities, as well as for-profit and not-for-profitentities. The Commission considers that this definition, limited to not-for-profitentities, would be an appropriate legislative model to use to define the scope ofthe organisations to which its recommendations should apply. 1204.62 The Commission recommends that the proposed legislation shoulddistinguish between, on the one hand, the liability of individuals, and, on theother, the liability of organisations, whether unincorporated or incorporated,which are not formed for profit.(4) Protected Conduct4.63 The Commission notes that some jurisdictions limit the application oftheir Good Samaritan legislation to certain species of conduct, such asinterventions of a medical nature or the provision of first aid assistance. Forexample, protection under the Oklahoma statute is available only for acts ofartificial respiration, restoration of breathing, preventing blood loss, or restoring120On the benefits of incorporation, see Part B, above.108