Disclaimers

[didds]

Reading another thread in a different foirum about open swimming events and their costs somebody raised the following point wrt cost v safety cover

" prices are often justified on the basis of all this safety cover but then you still often have to sign a disclaimer that if anything happens to you, you swam at your own risk"

Are such disclaimers really valid legally? I can;t see that they can absolve an organiser from all and any issues?

didds

[pochisoldi]

Consumer protection legislation means that a supplier can't exclude liability for death or injury to a customer due to the supplier's negligence.

However a properly written disclaimer is still a useful tool as it is a clear admission that the participant was informed of the risks, and entered into the activity regardless, and it also serves as a hurdle to overcome spurious sue balls from the no-win no-fee end of the legal market.

PochiSoldi

[Lootman]

it also serves as a hurdle to overcome spurious sue balls from the no-win no-fee end of the legal market.

Are you suggesting that a payment mechanism that allows everyone access to justice regardless of whether they have money, is somehow a bad thing?

Personally I don't tend to attach a lot of significance to documents like this. They can be quite long and it often isn't reasonable or practicable to read every word. Or you are under duress to sign it for one reason or another. So I generally just sign them and then ignore them. I will usually make it clear that I am signing it on the understanding that it is fair and reasonable. Most important rights cannot be waived anyway.

[pochisoldi]

it also serves as a hurdle to overcome spurious sue balls from the no-win no-fee end of the legal market.

Are you suggesting that a payment mechanism that allows everyone access to justice regardless of whether they have money, is somehow a bad thing?

There's "righting a wrong" justice, and there's "where there's blame, there's a claim" justice.

For the former, "no win, no fee" isn't always there to help. With the latter, "no win, no fee" sometimes results in a claim of dubious merit getting paid as a stop loss transaction by the defendant, because the time/cost of defending such a claim is better spent elsewhere.