Printable View
I have an off-the-cuff discussion with two lawyer friends about whether a parlour owner would be legally liable if a client contracts Delta through his unvaccinated girl.
None of them wants to be definite about it as it's a very new scenario.
It would be an iffy case remotely similar to if you have food poisoning after eating in a restaurant but the evidence is more difficult to prove.
They walked away saying, "We need to study it."
No one has been charged for transmitting the virus, people are charged for breaking public health orders, not for infecting others…
Would it be any different to getting an STI off a girl?
How would it be different to any other close contact business that's allowed to reopen as long as all staff are vacinnated? Like hair salon or nail salon.
If the girl is vaccinated then that's just your bad luck. If the business allows the girl to work without confirming that she is vaccinated, then they would be liable. Much like checking the girls have an appropriate work visa i would imagine.
It's not illegal to be unvaccinated so I can't see that anyone would win trying to claim against an unvaccinated person or their employer.
Such a case would surely fail on all causality tests. There are so many unprovable factors here: who had it first, who knew they had it first, what does vaccination do in regards to virus transmission, etc.
In fact, I think the girl and shop would have a strong case to sue the customer for potentially putting their unvaccinated staff in peril. The picture is, here's a shop going about their business, then along comes a customer who actively brought the virus into their bubble. The passive side usually wins such an argument.
Liable for what?
The vaccinated person can still carries the virus and pass on to another person unknowingly so the proving it is hard. But if a person is knowingly know have the virus then is a different matter just like having HIV then you gave a case.
Monsanto fukd over more than one canola farmerQuote:
Originally Posted by GoldfishMan
Not illegal, but restrictions can be placed on people who are not.Quote:
Originally Posted by CountryPunter
It's happening in Qantas, this is from a friend who works there.Quote:
Originally Posted by aussiegaigin
https://www.qantasnewsroom.com.au/me...inst-covid-19/
Frontline employees – including cabin crew, pilots and airport workers – will need to be fully vaccinated by 15 November 2021 and the remainder of employees by 31 March 2022. There will be exemptions for those who are unable for documented medical reasons to be vaccinated, which is expected to be very rare.
Sent from my GM1910 using Tapatalk
So, can the govt claim the cost of the current outbreak from Fedex, employers of the crew who are thought to have transmitted the first case of Delta to limo man?
Didn't they have a duty of care to ensure their crew were tested and vaccinated before flying?
Good luck with that!
We should launch a class action on behalf of all punters who have suffered blue balls due to lockdowns imposed as a result of the negligence of Federal and State Governments.
Slater and Gordon will take on the case for us for sure.
They will do it pro bono - or pro boner in our case.
I would say, only of there is some specific regulation mandating it. It would still be the responsibility of our border controls to enforce restrictions.Quote:
Originally Posted by adahar
A bit cringey of a punchline bro...Quote:
Originally Posted by rooter
I am sure it was meant in jest [emoji12]Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldfishMan
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
IANAL so not going to speculate, but since the pandemic began has there been a case where someone sued someone else for giving them COVID?
Not just quantas it's happening everywhere our work got told this week unless vaxed have to get rapid test a few times a week before entering work place and I heard a whisper that workers possibly have to pay for test .Vax is not mandatory but they are tightening the screws and making life difficult without itQuote:
Originally Posted by Riff888
With the virus being so rampant, it might be hard to prove that any one particular person passed it on, even if they tested positive.Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterWhippy
Places like nursing homes could be a target if it could be proved they were negligent in not containing it.
Isn't this question a bit like ..
You decided to BBFS one of the girls who you paid extras too and you got a dose of something ?
Is the shop owner liable ? Maybe if its a licensed brothel, but otherwise ?
You gonna sue the shop owner ?
(yeah I am sure you'll love the publicity as well)...
The only way to get a definitive answer is to get a willing lawyer to take the case to court, and get a ruling from a judge.
I am sure Slater & Gordon would do it pro boner?Quote:
Originally Posted by aussiegaigin