Bush fire victims Vs. SP AusNet – Civil law The survivors of the horrific Black Saturday fires, are suing the power company SP AusNet claiming its faulty equipment caused the disasters which lead to the death of 173 people. The lead plaintiff Ms Carol Matthews and an estimated 10,000 victims and relatives of the deceased, took the defendant SP AusNet to court for 500 million dollars in damages and personal distress. On the 7th of February 2009, a section of power lines located at Kilmore East broke and upon striking the ground, ignited a bushfire. The case came about after the Victorian Bushfires Royal Commission found the Kilmore East-Kinglake bushfire was caused by an ageing SP AusNet power line. The class action took place at the start …show more content…
SP AusNet's position during the trial, was that the conductor which broke and which initiated the fire was damaged by lightning, compromising its fail-safety design in a manner which was undetectable at the time. Evidence was brought to court from the CFA and the Victorian Bushfires Royal Commission. A test power line was set up to simulate the situation, where the conductor was broken and did not initiate a fire, however SP AusNet dismissed this evidence in the court, as the test was set up on private property without consent of the …show more content…
Manslaughter and any other form of murder are understood to be a criminal crime. This case is a criminal case a there is no dispute between two parties, but a crime where was committed such as killing someone, as a result Mr Marshall violated the common laws of Australia and the crime has been classified as a criminal
The Triangle Shirtwaist Fire not only affected the city of New York, but also the rest of the country. It forever changed the way our country would look at safety regulations in factories and buildings. The fire proved to America what can and will happen if we over-look safety regulations and over-crowd buildings. Unfortunately, 146 lives are taken before we fully understand this concept.
In West Warwick Rhode Island, on February 20th, 2003, during the performance of the band Great White, a fire broke out that eventually claimed the lives of 100 people and injured an additional 200. The band’s tour manager arranged for, and ignited pyrotechnic props, large fireworks designed to display a shower of sparks. The sparks ignited foam soundproofing near stage. The fire spread quickly. Most were killed either in the crush to exit the building or overcome by fumes while trying to find an exit. The immediate cause was well documented due to witness reports and a videotape that was taken during the concert. In the period that followed the tragedy there were many attempts to fix blame. Following a Grand Jury investigation, several of the parties involved plead guilty to violations of the law and served or are currently sentences in prison.
On the fateful and unforgettable afternoon of June 17, 1972 Hotel Vendome experienced yet another fire. Actually it experienced several fires in different locations on this date. Electricians working on the first floor reported smoke coming from the upper floors, and a bartender reported smoke in the basement. All occupants in the basement café were safely escorted out, and 3 engine companies, 2 ladder companies, and 1 District Chief arrived on scene noticing ...
The business and political atmosphere during this time was very corrupt. No one was really interested in the safety of their workers they were more focused on making more money. Precautions that would be used to prevent fires such as fire extinguishers, sprinkler systems, or even working water hoses were not available. In the case of a fire it was nothing that could really be done. Triangle Factory owners, Max Blanck and Isaac Haris, had a history with their factories catching fire. Blanck and Haris would purposely set their businesses on fire so they could collect large insurance policies, which is one of the reasons why they did not install a sprinkler system. They needed something to help them just in case they were to burn down another
Common law and modern state statutes typically divide manslaughter and murder into two different levels of crime. Common law, for instance, separates manslaughter into two separate categories. The first category would be voluntary manslaughter and the second category would be involuntary manslaughter. Manslaughter, alone, is all homicides without justification or excuse. Modern state statues, in the other hand, divide murder into first- and second-degree murder, both of which require the prosecutor to establish intent and malice. Murder, alone, is all homicides that are neither excused nor justified.
In the case of Michael Buckley, it seemed to be a difficult situation to remedy; however, it would seem that clearly Buckley had experienced a situation of exposure. The exposure was evident, Mr. Buckley’s body covered in a substance known to cause illness and death, e.g., Cancer (Montgomery, 1998) . Nevertheless, Buckley did not seek any help in understanding his situation therefor, he did not show signs of a traumatic experience. Buckley would later file suit under the direction of federal employer liability act (FELA) (Montgomery, 1998; Twomey, Jennings, & Anderson, 2011). The lawsuit was based primarily on the belief that Mr. Buckley had indeed encountered a traumatic episode that rendered Buckley emotionally distressed. However, according to the readings, Buckley did experience and exposure to a harmful substance, e.g. asbestos it would be difficult under the terms of the law to prove he experienced a traumatic event being that Buckley refuses any assistance from the psychiatrist or medical personnel determine his State of mind at that time. Still under the law as it's reviewed by the second court Buckley had only to express concern as stated in the court preceding e.g., Metro – North Transit Inspector General, Supervisor,
Power lines, Lighting, machinery and Arsonist are confirmed causes of the Black Saturday Bushfires. The drought, the hot temperatures, strong winds and the other factors are said to be the cause of the black Saturday bushfires
The movie “A Civil Action” released on January 8, 1999 provides viewers with an extraordinary story of the nightmare that occurred in Woburn Massachusetts in the late 1970’s. The people of this small town at the time had no idea what was going on until there were various cases of Leukemia in small children that ultimately resulted in the early passing of them. The people eventually had gone to find out that the drinking water in this small town was contaminated and there were many women that stepped in to get answers. This movie is a tremendously jaw dropping, eye opening account of a heartbreaking true story incident. There are various elements of negligence in this movie including, duty, legal cause, proximate cause and damages.
may face is economic loss. This is because Acme Underground Ltd. owes a duty of care to provide correct report of the sub-surface conditions to Mr.Sharp and the Municipality. Yet, they breach such duty when Subsurface Wizard determined that Acme Underground has made a significant error by not fully testing the soil. This caused the Municipality 350 thousand dollars extra to build the revised design [6]. However, this is not possible for the Municipality to pay because they stated to Mr.Sharp that it is not economically feasible for them to build the bridge if it costed more than 1.8 million dollars [6]. Since the Municipality contracted ABC Construction, they cannot breach the contract to stop the construction either. The 1982 precedent case, Junior Books Ltd. v. Veitchi Co. Ltd. [5], displays another example of how someone’s negligence can cause economic damages. In the precedent case, a negligently laid floor, not dangerous, caused the plaintiff to suffer numerous losses such as replacing the floor and business disturbance [4]. The defendant was later found liable and must pay the plaintiff for the profit loss of the time [4]. It is evident from this case that one can be found liable because of his/her negligent act. This is clearly displayed by Acme Underground as their negligence with the sub-surface conditions report caused the Municipality to suffer an economic loss. Therefore, Acme Underground Ltd. is highly
In their defense Pittston made attempts to distort the truth. They tried to separate themselves from the Buffalo Coal Company the subsidiary company which operated the failed dam. Pittston had the equity to compensate the plaintiffs while the Buffalo Coal Company was not valued high enough to give victims compensation. The lawyers from Arnold & Porter chose to sue the parent company because it was necessary to reach an adequate settlement. Psychic-impairment was used by the plaintiffs because it would give them the most compensation, and made up for the maximum amount state law allowed.
...needs to look out for the business owners. Business people also need to understand that the cost to install a fire sprinkler system is nowhere compare to a devastation of a big fire. Some people can never learn anything without making mistakes first. If tragedy happens again, business owners will truly appreciate the act and the system.
Some speculate that it was the horrible working conditions that started the fire. The factory was filthy, crowded, workers worked long hours in dirty firetraps and crippling machinery. Commission investigators discovered this first hand when they were ordered to crawl
In January 2005, a fire in a Bronx apartment building caused six firefighters to jump from the fourth floor in attempt to escape the fire, which left four injured and two dead. Their lives were put at risk due to mistakes and unfamiliarity with equipment. Due lack of knowledge on hydraulics and sufficient water
The case concerned a number of claims presented by the families of the service men. One group, the ‘Challenger’ claimants, argued that under common law negligence, the MoD failed to provide equipment with the suitable technology to sufficiently protect the Servicemen. The MoD was alleged to have further failed by providing inadequate pre-deployment and in theatre t...
Arson is one of the oldest crimes recognized throughout the world. It is defined as the intentional and malicious burning of a structure or building (Montaldo). Arson can cost the lives of individuals and the damages can be costly. In 2010, there were about 260,600 fires (“Arson and Intentional Fires,” n.d.). Many of these fires were intentionally set. These fires have resulted in an estimated 390 deaths, 1,340 injuries, and $1.2 billion in damages (“Arson and Intentional Fires,” n.d.). Most of the fires have occurred outside, but most of the deaths, injuries, and losses occurred in structures, particularly in homes (“Arson and Intentional Fires,” n.d.). Arson is considered to be a property crime to law enforcement agencies, despite that the fires created by the arsonist can injure and kill many people. This paper will discuss the history of arson as well as explaining why arson is difficult to prove, why people commit it, and also provides specific case examples and suggestions on what people can do to reduce the risk of arson.