Posts Tagged ‘Europe’

Things your auto can’t do

In many vehicles nowadays, you can check your e-mail, view Web sites, even watch television, from the comfort of your driver’s seat.

You can, that is, if you live in Europe or in Japan….

Fear of legal action has also stopped Toyota from offering its Intelligent Parking Assist feature, which is now available on the hybrid gas-electric Prius model sold in Japan.

Executives say they “must worry about lawsuits” if potential dashboard distractions fall into the hands of Americans. A Toyota corporate sales manager says there are no plans to make the intelligent-parking feature available in the United States, either: “This is a very litigious society.” (Eric A. Taub, “Three Amazing Things Your Automobile Can’t Do”, New York Times, Oct. 27).

EC fax mistake

Five German banks appealed a 100-million Euro fine by the European Commission. The European Court of the First Instance reversed the fine when the EC attorney faxing a brief “accidentally placed it face upwards in the fax machine”; the court received 100 blank pages instead of the brief, and defaulted the appeal. Press accounts are unclear whether the EC’s right to review that decision has effectively been waived. (James Kirkup, “EC loses ?70m after lawyer botches fax”, The Scotsman, Oct. 16). Washington state also had a similar problem when an attorney forgot to appeal an $18 million judgment against the state. (Sep. 13, 2000) (via Fark).

Rare-burger disclaimers, cont’d

“An exclusive London restaurant stopped asking customers to sign a legal disclaimer if they order rare or medium-rare burgers after the practice came to the attention of the city’s legal community. The restaurant at the five-star Marriott West India Quay in London’s Docklands required diners to complete a form which said it waived the hotel chain’s responsibilities should they suffer food poisoning.” (“Rare burger? Just don’t sue us”, CNN, Sept. 29). We first covered the burger-disclaimer issue more than five years ago: see Aug. 9, 1999.

$2M suit against city for home plate collision

Over-35 Men’s Slow-Pitch softball player Michael Licitra is suing an opposing player, John Knowles, and the Village of Garden City for $2 million over a broken left leg suffered in a collision at home plate in September 2001. Knowles claims he legally slid head-first; Licitra claims it was a collision that violated league softball rules, though that doesn’t explain why it’s the city’s fault. (Jonathan Mummolo, “Injured softballer crying foul”, Newsday, Jul. 15) (via Romenesko). State Supreme Court Justice Bruce D. Alpert held that the doctrine of assumption of risk “did not relieve the defendant from the obligation of using reasonable care to guard against a risk which might reasonably be anticipated,” which begs the question what Garden City should’ve done differently other than ban softball.

Which, according to Alex Tabarrok, is what is happening to the British school tradition of playing conkers, which occasionally results in bruises from inadvertent (but apparently inevitable) contact. Liability concerns are causing schools to ban the game–along with rugby, soccer, and even recess. The New York Times has an article about the larger issue of the growing problem of American-style lawsuits in Britain. Medical negligence claim costs have risen more than a hundredfold after inflation in the last thirty years. (Sarah Lyall, “Britain’s Stiff Upper Lip Is Being Twisted Into a Snarl”, Jul. 13).

Ireland’s Personal Injuries Assessment Board

In a far-reaching reform intended to curb its rising litigation rate, Ireland recently adopted the system sometimes known as scheduled damages: an official panel, the Personal Injuries Assessment Board, has been established to publish recommended guidelines (the “Quantum”) for the pain and suffering component of sued-over serious injuries, thus reducing the need to litigate each damage determination afresh. Scheduled compensation and like devices are often encountered in European court systems but, aside from workers’ compensation, are virtually unknown here. I discuss the Irish reforms and their implications at more length today on Point of Law.

They’re using your name! Let’s get ’em!

The central character in a new Tom Hanks movie, “The Terminal”, is a hapless Eastern European tourist by the name of “Viktor Navorski,” a name recalling that of the veteran left-wing author and Nation magazine publisher Victor Navasky. “Whenever a commercial for ‘The Terminal’ appeared on television, my phone would ring and it would be another attorney assuring me that my ship had come in. Clearly I had a case for “misappropriation of my name and likeness,’ ‘expropriation of my right of publicity’ and my favorite, ‘product disparagement.'” (Victor Navasky, “You Say Navorski, He Says Navasky”, Los Angeles Times, Jul. 5).

U.K.: Great moments in immigration law

In Great Britain, Immigration Minister Beverley Hughes has resigned following a scandal over reports of well-organized fraud and abuse in visa applications from Romania and Bulgaria. “Applicants from Eastern Europe have to demonstrate they can set up a business generating income in Britain. Sir John [Ramsden, a senior Foreign Office official] said the embassy received 70 ‘virtually identical business plans’ from one firm of London solicitors acting for agents in Bulgaria.” James Cameron, a British consul in the Romanian capital of Bucharest, said that “fraudulent applications were being nodded through by the suitcase load without proper checks. He claimed visas had been given to [among others] builders and electricians who ‘knew nothing about bricks, mortar or electrical details’. ‘The applicants rarely know what is in their business plan, cannot speak English, and have absolutely no knowledge or experience in the type of skills needed for respective businesses,’ he said.” Home Secretary David Blunkett announced that a lawyer who had been “involved in fraud and in unacceptable illegal dealings” had been arrested at the end of February. (George Jones, “Blunkett orders inquiry after immigration scandal deepens”, Daily Telegraph, Mar. 13; Brendan Carlin and Ian Waugh, “‘Organized scam’ over immigrant entry to UK”, Yorkshire Post, Mar. 31; “Blair’s worst nightmare”, Yorkshire Post, Apr. 2).

Moody’s blamed for Bolshevik bond renunciation

The French Association of Russian Bondholders (or AFPER) is unhappy that the government of the Soviet Union repudiated the debts of its czarist predecessor, leaving it (or, more accurately, its members’ predecessors) with worthless paper. So in an interesting inversion of causality, in June 2001 it misguidedly sued Moody’s and S&P for providing ratings to the debt of the new post-Soviet Russian government in 1996, and sought to hold the rating companies liable for the debts of the earlier iterations of the Russian government. A Paris court finally got around to throwing the case out today. (Reuters, April 6).