Civil liability in recreational diving

Last updated

The civil liability of a recreational diver may include a duty of care to another diver during a dive. Breach of this duty that is a proximate cause of injury or loss to the other diver may lead to civil litigation for damages in compensation for the injury or loss suffered.

Contents

Participation in recreational diving implies acceptance of the inherent risks of the activity [1] Diver training includes training in procedures known to reduce these risks to a level considered acceptable by the certification agency, and issue of certification implies that the agency accepts that the instructor has assessed the diver to be sufficiently competent in these skills at the time of assessment and to be competent to accept the associated risks. Certification relates to a set of skills and knowledge defined by the associated training standard, which also specifies the limitations on the scope of diving activities for which the diver is deemed competent. These limitations involve depth, environment and equipment that the diver has been trained to use. Intentionally diving significantly beyond the scope of certified competence is at the diver's risk, and may be construed as negligence if it puts another person at risk. Recommendations generally suggest that extending the scope should be done gradually, and preferably under the guidance of a diver experienced in similar conditions. The training agencies usually specify that any extension of scope should only be done by further training under a registered instructor, but this is not always practicable, or even possible, as there can always be circumstances that differ from those experienced during training.

Retention of skills requires exercise of those skills, and prolonged periods between dives will degrade skills by unpredictable amounts. This is recognised by training agencies which require instructors to keep in date, and recommend that divers take part in refresher courses after long periods of diving inactivity.

Duty

A recreational diver may have a duty of care to another diver if one of these conditions occurs: [2]

The existence of a duty of care between two persons depends on the relationship between them. Dive buddies who depend on each other to perform tasks such as equipment checks and provide assistance in an emergency are obliged to act reasonably and not increase the risks of the activity, but may be excluded from liability by assumption of the risk or waiver. [3]

Duty of the operator

Where relevant, the dive operator is responsible for:

In some jurisdictions the dive boat skipper may be legally obliged to be licensed to operate a dive boat. In South Africa a "diving endorsement" to the skipper's certificate of competence is a requirement to operate a dive boat as a commercial operation. [5]

In a number of US cases, the failure of a charter operator to assign a buddy has been ruled a breach of the industry standard of care. It is not clear what competence or certification is required to allocate buddy pairs, and whether this duty would also apply to a boat operator who is not a divemaster or instructor. Defendants have argued that a person who dived without an allocated buddy was contributorily negligent as they also did not meet the appropriate standard of care. [3]

Limiting the liability of the operator

Waivers and release
The waiver is intended as a legal defense against lawsuits claiming ordinary negligence by the operator. The diver acknowledges understanding and acceptance of the risks inherent to scuba diving. The waiver may also require the diver to follow recognised safe diving practices. By signing the waiver the diver agrees not to sue the operator for injuries and damage due to ordinary negligence relating to the diving activity. It will generally not be enforceable for gross negligence and events beyond the normal scope of diving. [4]
Medical statement
The medical statement is intended to draw the diver's attention to the range of medical conditions that may increase the risk of injury during a dive. Failure to disclose a known medical condition which is then the cause of an injury will usually disqualify the diver from legal compensation, and may also void an insurance claim. It also transfers responsibility for establishing fitness to dive from the operator to the diver. [4]

Duty of the diver

The certified diver is responsible for ensuring that their personal equipment, competence and fitness is sufficient to ensure their own safety in and under the water on the planned dive, allowing for reasonably foreseeable contingencies, and to follow safe diving practices. [4]

A diver in training may not be competent to assume one or more of these duties, or their competence may be limited, depending on their existing certification. The duty of care of the instructor is to compensate for the known or reasonably predictable shortfalls in the learner's competence.[ citation needed ]

Responsibilities of buddies

The responsibilities of dive buddies have been established by training standards and usage, but there is no definitive list of buddy legal obligations. An effective way to protect oneself from liability is to comply with the buddy practices agreed between the divers before the dive, and not make assumptions that both parties are following the same set of practices. [6] Buddies are responsible for:

  • planning the dive, taking into account known hazards and personal limitations and the level of risk acceptable to both [3]
  • visually checking each other's equipment after kitting up and before entering the water [3]
  • monitoring each other's safety throughout the dive [3]
  • providing assistance to an entangled buddy [3]
  • sharing breathing gas in an emergency [3]
  • getting each other to the surface in an emergency [3]

Training agencies may differ in the detail of the procedures divers are expected to use in each of these cases. In most cases both systems work and are reasonably compatible when they require the active participation of one diver at a time, but there are examples where differences could lead to complications. For example, the specific procedures for sharing air can vary considerably between agencies, and have changed over time. It is quite possible for a buddy pair to have been trained in two conflicting protocols for air sharing, and each use equipment selected according to the system they were trained to use. In an emergency this could lead to sub-optimal response even if the procedures had been agreed during planning.

Divers may be given vague, conflicting and outmoded advice:

  • "Always dive with a buddy." – Solo diving is fairly common, it is actively promoted in books and magazines, there are recognised certifications in solo diving, a great deal of nominally buddy diving is effectively solo diving, and solo diving can eliminate the risks of an incompetent buddy. On the other hand, service providers may be found negligent if they do not allocate buddies. [2] [6]
  • "Know how to use decompression tables." – Many divers use dive computers exclusively for diving where no obligatory decompression is required, and a computer failure can be satisfactorily managed by an immediate ascent at a controlled rate. Some of these divers never use tables, and have no obvious need to be able to do so. [2]
  • "Do not make decompression dives." – All dives are decompression dives, and what is actually meant is not to do dives that require decompression stops during a direct ascent from any point in the planned dive profile. Dives requiring stops are fairly common when using dive computers with conservative algorithms, safety stops and slow ascent rates. Extended-range and tech diving routinely require planned decompression, and mitigation procedures for a possible computer failure on a decompression dive are well known. [2]
  • "Do not dive beyond 60 feet (18 m) as an open-water diver or beyond 130 feet (40 m) as a recreational diver."   This is the policy of only some diver certification agencies, and may be appropriate for their training standards. Other organisations with different training standards have established different recommendations. Technical divers are generally considered competent to dive to greater depths, and technical diving is legally considered recreational diving in some jurisdictions, such as the USA. [2]

Solo diving option

An option for some divers is to dive without a buddy. Although this would relieve the diver of any duty to a buddy and any related liability, this may not be permitted by the service provider, or in a few cases, by national law.

Not all dive professionals agree that the buddy system is entirely preferable to solo diving. Even professionals who basically support the buddy system in theory accept that in practice it often leaves a great deal to be desired, and that in some circumstances diving solo may be safer as this avoids the hazards imposed by a panicked or incompetent buddy. Solo diving advocates also contend that most dives do not follow the buddy system as specified by the training agencies, as the divers are often too far apart to notice if a problem occurs or to respond effectively. [3]

Remedies

The usual strategies used by divers to minimize the likelihood of being sued and the consequences of a lawsuit are insurance, liability releases and care in selecting a buddy. [3] Following the accepted procedures when buddy diving, ensuring personal competence and taking due care will reduce the risk of an incident occurring due to fault of the diver, and if one does occur, will be a useful defence against claims of negligence. [6]

Insurance
Adequate insurance cover of the defendant will not generally prevent litigation, as the policy may be seen as a guarantee of ability to pay, and may thereby encourage litigation, but it does provide financial relief for the defendant. Adequate cover of the injured party is more likely to result in an insurance payout than litigation, however many insurance policies exclude cover for voluntary activities which may be construed as "dangerous", or specifically exclude scuba diving. [3] [6]
Specific liability releases
Divers who want liability protection beyond that afforded by insurance may provide specific waivers or amend service provider waivers to include buddies as persons contractually shielded from liability. [3]
Choice of buddy
An obvious solution is for the diver to be a competent, responsible buddy, to follow recommended procedure at all times, and to only dive with a buddy who is known to also be competent, responsible and to follow the same recommended procedures at all times. A competent diver with extensive experience who practices emergency procedures often enough to respond with confidence is less likely to panic in an emergency. [3] Buddies equipment must be compatible and allow the emergency procedures familiar to both divers. [7] A diver should not allow the service provider to pressure them into accepting a diver as a buddy if they are not reasonably confident that the allocated diver is both competent and willing to behave as a responsible buddy. [6]

Inherent dangers and assumption of risk

In recreational diving the participant is taking on a voluntary risk. [8] In sport participants accept that other participants may be careless and may cause injuries to others due to inept behaviour. [3]

Assumption of risk is a defense in the law of torts, which bars or reduces a plaintiff's right to recovery against a negligent tortfeasor if the defendant can demonstrate that the plaintiff voluntarily and knowingly assumed the risks at issue inherent to the dangerous activity in which they were participating at the time of the injury. [9]

What is usually meant by assumption of risk is more precisely termed primary or "express" assumption of risk. It occurs when the plaintiff has either expressly or implicitly relieved the defendant of the duty to mitigate or relieve the risk causing the injury from which the cause of action arises. It operates as a complete bar to liability on the theory that upon assumption of the risk, there is no longer a duty of care between the defendant and the plaintiff, and without a duty owed by the defendant, there can be no negligence on their part. [10] However, primary assumption of risk is not a blanket exemption from liability for the operators of a dangerous activity. The specific risk causing the injury must have been known to, and appreciated by, the plaintiff in order for primary assumption of risk to apply. Also, assumption of risk does not absolve a defendant of liability for reckless conduct. [11]

Breach

To establish negligence in a civil court there must be a breach of duty which can be shown to have caused harm to the other person. [2]

A breach is a failure to follow an appropriate standard of care where a duty exists based on a relationship. This can occur between buddies and between a provider and a client. [3]

Once it is established that the defendant owed a duty to the plaintiff/claimant, the matter of whether or not that duty was breached must be settled. A defendant who knowingly exposes the plaintiff/claimant to a substantial risk of loss, or fails to recognise a substantial risk of loss to the plaintiff/claimant, which any reasonable person in the same situation would clearly recognise, breaches that duty. [12] [13]

Negligence

The standard action in tort is negligence. The tort of negligence provides a cause of action leading to damages, or to relief, in each case designed to protect legal rights, including those of personal safety, property, and, in some cases, intangible economic interests or noneconomic interests such as the tort of negligent infliction of emotional distress in the United States. Negligence actions include claims following personal injury accidents of many kinds, including scuba diving.

If although not intending to do harm someone can reasonably foresee that their actions could harm another person, and they continue with those actions and do not stop, and that other person is eventually injured or suffers damages as a consequence of those actions, that is negligence, and the injured party can hold the negligent person liable for compensation. [8]

Dereliction of duty of care

A person who has a legal duty to take reasonable care and does not do so, can be held liable for damages that are directly caused by the breach of that duty. Directly caused means that the injury or damage is a direct consequence of the failure to perform the reasonable duty. Reasonable care is the standard of care that is considered reasonable to expect in a given situation, taking into account the conditions, experience, training, qualifications, etc. The standard does not require perfection and makes allowance for mistakes and errors in judgement, provided that the person has exercised caution appropriate to the circumstances. In determining a standard of care, the courts would take an objective approach, and take into account the person's specific knowledge or experience, and the level at which the person represented themself. [8]

Litigation

When a voluntarily accepted risk leads to an involuntary injury there must be evidence of someone either doing something that they should not have done or not doing something that they should have done before a claim for damages can succeed. [8]

A large proportion of cases are litigated due to uncertainty of the cause of the accident. [14]

The history of appeal cases in the USA tend to rule that the buddy relationship creates a duty to act reasonably and not increase the risks associated with diving. The existence of damages can usually be proven though the amount may be contested. The aspect that is usually litigated is whether a breach occurred and whether the breach was a proximate case of the injury. A defense often raised is assumption of the risk by the plaintiff, supported where applicable by a signed waiver. [3]

In about 70% of diving fatalities, drowning is reported as the cause of death, without specifying the reason for drowning. Drowning generally just means that the diver died underwater and there was no physical obstacle to water entering the respiratory passages. It is a diagnosis that is often reached in the absence of a more specific understanding of the sequence of events, and often reached when little effort has gone into the investigation to exclude other possible causes to find out why the diver drowned. [14]

There is a common misconception and presumption by the general public that someone should have intervened to prevent the drowning, which presupposes that someone should have known it was happening, and was negligent in not taking preventative action. A large amount of litigation is based on the desire to hold someone else accountable, and this is aggravated by the commonly inadequate investigation and vague conclusions regarding the trigger and sequence of events in fatal accidents. Statistic indicate that the majority of diving fatalities are due to error on the part of the victim. [14]

Preservation of evidence

Failure to identify, preserve, and produce critical evidence such as dive computer data can result in sanctions against the responsible party, including findings in favour of the party requesting the lost information. Investigators without a sufficient knowledge of diving equipment have been known to destroy or lose critical evidence through mishandling of equipment, even when it survived rescue and recovery efforts. [14]

Proximate cause

In law, a proximate cause is an event sufficiently related to an injury that the courts deem the event to be the cause of that injury. There are two types of causation in the law: cause-in-fact, and proximate (or legal) cause, which tends to be an act or omission by a person. Legal causation is the "causal relationship between conduct and result". In other words, causation provides a means of connecting conduct with a resulting effect, typically an injury, as a means to establishing the scope of liability. In many cases negligence can be attributed to both the plaintiff, or decedent, and the defendants. The degree of negligence established by the court reduces the recovery of damages in that proportion. [3]

Damages

In a claim for damages the plaintiff must convince the court that injury or loss occurred, and that the compensation value claimed is realistic. Damages are likely to be limited to those reasonably foreseeable by the defendant. If a defendant could not reasonably have foreseen that someone might be hurt by their actions, there may be no liability.

Related Research Articles

Negligence is a failure to exercise appropriate and/or ethical ruled care expected to be exercised amongst specified circumstances. The area of tort law known as negligence involves harm caused by failing to act as a form of carelessness possibly with extenuating circumstances. The core concept of negligence is that people should exercise reasonable care in their actions, by taking account of the potential harm that they might foreseeably cause to other people or property.

A divemaster (DM) is a role that includes organising and leading recreational dives, particularly in a professional capacity, and is a qualification used in many parts of the world in recreational scuba diving for a diver who has supervisory responsibility for a group of divers and as a dive guide. As well as being a generic term, 'Divemaster' is the title of the first professional rating of many training agencies, such as PADI, SSI, SDI, NASE, except NAUI, which rates a NAUI Divemaster under a NAUI Instructor but above a NAUI Assistant Instructor. The divemaster certification is generally equivalent to the requirements of ISO 24801-3 Dive Leader.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Recreational diver training</span> Training process for people who do not dive at work

Recreational diver training is the process of developing knowledge and understanding of the basic principles, and the skills and procedures for the use of scuba equipment so that the diver is able to dive for recreational purposes with acceptable risk using the type of equipment and in similar conditions to those experienced during training.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Recreational diving</span> Diving for the purpose of leisure and enjoyment, usually when using scuba equipment

Recreational diving or sport diving is diving for the purpose of leisure and enjoyment, usually when using scuba equipment. The term "recreational diving" may also be used in contradistinction to "technical diving", a more demanding aspect of recreational diving which requires more training and experience to develop the competence to reliably manage more complex equipment in the more hazardous conditions associated with the disciplines. Breath-hold diving for recreation also fits into the broader scope of the term, but this article covers the commonly used meaning of scuba diving for recreational purposes, where the diver is not constrained from making a direct near-vertical ascent to the surface at any point during the dive, and risk is considered low.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Professional diving</span> Underwater diving where divers are paid for their work

Professional diving is underwater diving where the divers are paid for their work. The procedures are often regulated by legislation and codes of practice as it is an inherently hazardous occupation and the diver works as a member of a team. Due to the dangerous nature of some professional diving operations, specialized equipment such as an on-site hyperbaric chamber and diver-to-surface communication system is often required by law, and the mode of diving for some applications may be regulated.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Diving medicine</span> Diagnosis, treatment and prevention of disorders caused by underwater diving

Diving medicine, also called undersea and hyperbaric medicine (UHB), is the diagnosis, treatment and prevention of conditions caused by humans entering the undersea environment. It includes the effects on the body of pressure on gases, the diagnosis and treatment of conditions caused by marine hazards and how relationships of a diver's fitness to dive affect a diver's safety. Diving medical practitioners are also expected to be competent in the examination of divers and potential divers to determine fitness to dive.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Scuba diving</span> Swimming underwater, breathing gas carried by the diver

Scuba diving is a mode of underwater diving whereby divers use breathing equipment that is completely independent of a surface air supply, and therefore has a limited but variable endurance. The name "scuba", an acronym for "Self-Contained Underwater Breathing Apparatus", was coined by Christian J. Lambertsen in a patent submitted in 1952. Scuba divers carry their own source of breathing gas, usually compressed air, affording them greater independence and movement than surface-supplied divers, and more time underwater than free divers. Although the use of compressed air is common, a gas blend with a higher oxygen content, known as enriched air or nitrox, has become popular due to the reduced nitrogen intake during long or repetitive dives. Also, breathing gas diluted with helium may be used to reduce the likelihood and effects of nitrogen narcosis during deeper dives.

Assumption of risk is a defense, specifically an affirmative defense, in the law of torts, which bars or reduces a plaintiff's right to recovery against a negligent tortfeasor if the defendant can demonstrate that the plaintiff voluntarily and knowingly assumed the risks at issue inherent to the dangerous activity in which the plaintiff was participating at the time of their injury.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Solo diving</span> Recreational diving without a dive buddy

Solo diving is the practice of self-sufficient underwater diving without a "dive buddy", particularly with reference to scuba diving, but the term is also applied to freediving. Professionally, solo diving has always been an option which depends on operational requirements and risk assessment. Surface supplied diving and atmospheric suit diving are commonly single diver underwater activities but are accompanied by an on-surface support team dedicated to the safety of the diver, including a stand-by diver, and are not considered solo diving in this sense.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Buddy diving</span> Practice of mutual monitoring and assistance between two divers

Buddy diving is the use of the buddy system by scuba divers. It is a set of safety procedures intended to improve the chances of avoiding or surviving accidents in or under water by having divers dive in a group of two or sometimes three. When using the buddy system, members of the group dive together and co-operate with each other, so that they can help or rescue each other in the event of an emergency. This is most effective if both divers are competent in all relevant skills and sufficiently aware of the situation that they can respond in time, which is a matter of both attitude and competence.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Diving supervisor</span> Professional diving team leader responsible for safety

The diving supervisor is the professional diving team member who is directly responsible for the diving operation's safety and the management of any incidents or accidents that may occur during the operation; the supervisor is required to be available at the control point of the diving operation for the diving operation's duration, and to manage the planned dive and any contingencies that may occur. Details of competence, requirements, qualifications, registration and formal appointment differ depending on jurisdiction and relevant codes of practice. Diving supervisors are used in commercial diving, military diving, public safety diving and scientific diving operations.

Human factors are the physical or cognitive properties of individuals, or social behavior which is specific to humans, and influence functioning of technological systems as well as human-environment equilibria. The safety of underwater diving operations can be improved by reducing the frequency of human error and the consequences when it does occur. Human error can be defined as an individual's deviation from acceptable or desirable practice which culminates in undesirable or unexpected results.

Dive safety is primarily a function of four factors: the environment, equipment, individual diver performance and dive team performance. The water is a harsh and alien environment which can impose severe physical and psychological stress on a diver. The remaining factors must be controlled and coordinated so the diver can overcome the stresses imposed by the underwater environment and work safely. Diving equipment is crucial because it provides life support to the diver, but the majority of dive accidents are caused by individual diver panic and an associated degradation of the individual diver's performance. - M.A. Blumenberg, 1996

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Diver training</span> Processes by which people develop the skills and knowledge to dive safely underwater

Diver training is the set of processes through which a person learns the necessary and desirable skills to safely dive underwater within the scope of the diver training standard relevant to the specific training programme. Most diver training follows procedures and schedules laid down in the associated training standard, in a formal training programme, and includes relevant foundational knowledge of the underlying theory, including some basic physics, physiology and environmental information, practical skills training in the selection and safe use of the associated equipment in the specified underwater environment, and assessment of the required skills and knowledge deemed necessary by the certification agency to allow the newly certified diver to dive within the specified range of conditions at an acceptable level of risk. Recognition of prior learning is allowed in some training standards.

Dive leader is the title of an internationally recognised recreational diving certification. The training standard describes the minimum requirements for dive leader training and certification for recreational scuba divers in international standard ISO 24801-3 and the equivalent European Standard EN 14153-3. Various organizations offer training that meets the requirements of the dive leader standard. Some agencies use the title "Dive Leader" for their equivalent certification, but several other titles are also used, "Divemaster" may be the most widespread, but "Dive Supervisor" is also used, and should not be confused with the very different status and responsibilities of a professional diving supervisor. CMAS affiliates certifications which meet the requirements of CMAS 3-star diver should meet the standard by default. The occupation of a dive leader is also known as "dive guide", and is a specialist application of a "tour guide".

Diving safety is the aspect of underwater diving operations and activities concerned with the safety of the participants. The safety of underwater diving depends on four factors: the environment, the equipment, behaviour of the individual diver and performance of the dive team. The underwater environment can impose severe physical and psychological stress on a diver, and is mostly beyond the diver's control. Equipment is used to operate underwater for anything beyond very short periods, and the reliable function of some of the equipment is critical to even short-term survival. Other equipment allows the diver to operate in relative comfort and efficiency, or to remain healthy over the longer term. The performance of the individual diver depends on learned skills, many of which are not intuitive, and the performance of the team depends on competence, communication, attention and common goals.

Investigation of diving accidents includes investigations into the causes of reportable incidents in professional diving and recreational diving accidents, usually when there is a fatality or litigation for gross negligence.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Diving team</span> Group of people working together to enhance dive safety and achieve a task

A diving team is a group of people who work together to conduct a diving operation. A characteristic of professional diving is the specification for minimum personnel for the diving support team. This typically specifies the minimum number of support team members and their appointed responsibilities in the team based on the circumstances and mode of diving, and the minimum qualifications for specified members of the diving support team. The minimum team requirements may be specified by regulation or code of practice. Some specific appointments within a professional dive team have defined competences and registration may be required.

Scuba diving tourism is the industry based on servicing the requirements of recreational divers at destinations other than where they live. It includes aspects of training, equipment sales, rental and service, guided experiences and environmental tourism.

A dive briefing or pre-dive briefing is a meeting of the diving team or dive group before the dive to allow the supervisor, dive leader or dive boat skipper to inform the attendees of the dive plan, contingency plans and emergency plans for the dive. The amount of detail presented should be appropriate to the dive, but there are several topics which are considered standard components of a dive briefing. The topics may vary depending on context.

Recreational scuba certification levels are the levels of skill represented by recreational scuba certification. Each certification level is associated with a specific training standard published by the certification agency, and a training programme associated with the standard., though in some cases recognition of prior learning can apply. These levels of skill can be categorised in several ways:

References

  1. ↑ "Recreational accidents". cartercapner.com.au. Carter Capner Law. Retrieved 1 March 2018.
  2. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 staff (19 October 2006). "Buddy Diving: Legal Liabilities". Scuba Diving. Bonnier Corporation. Retrieved 1 March 2018.
  3. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Coleman, Phyllis G. (10 September 2008). "Scuba diving buddies: rights, obligations, and liabilities". University of San Francisco Maritime Law Journal. Nova Southeastern University Shepard Broad Law Center. 20 (1): 75. Retrieved 5 November 2016.
  4. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Robbs, Maureen (Fall 2013). "Legal Liability in Diving". Alert Diver. Divers Alert Network. Retrieved 1 March 2018.
  5. ↑ "Are you aware of what the National Small Vessel Safety Regulations require of you?" (PDF). www.samsa.org.za. July 2011. Retrieved 17 April 2020.
  6. 1 2 3 4 5 Coleman, Phyllis (March 2002). "Your Liability as a Buddy". Undercurrent. Vol. 17, no. 3. www.undercurrent.org.
  7. ↑ McDonald, Christian M.; Lang, Michael A. (18–20 May 2012). Vann, Richard D.; Denoble, Petar J.; Pollock, Neal W. (eds.). Rebreather perspective: The scientific diving community (PDF). Rebreather Forum 3 Proceedings. Durham, North Carolina: AAUS/DAN/PADI. pp. 35–43. ISBN   978-0-9800423-9-9. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2014-07-17. Retrieved 2018-03-01.
  8. ↑ Vargo, John F. (1978). "Comparative Fault: A Need for Reform of Indiana Tort Law". Indiana Law Review. 11: 832. Retrieved 29 November 2017.
  9. ↑ Knight v. Jewett , 3 Cal. 4th 296, 314-315 (1992).
  10. ↑ Cheong v. Antablin, 16 Cal. 4th 1067 (1997).
  11. ↑ Doubleday v Kelly [2005] NSWCA 151, Court of Appeal (NSW,Australia); see also Drinkwater v Howart [2006] NSWCA 222, Court of Appeal (NSW,Australia).
  12. ↑ Wyong Shire Council v Shirt [1980] HCA 12, (1980) 146 CLR 40(1 May 1980), High Court (Australia).
  13. 1 2 3 4 Concannon, David G. (2011). Vann, R. D.; Lang, M. A. (eds.). "Legal Issues Associated with Diving Fatalities: Panel Discussion" (PDF). Proceedings of the Divers Alert Network 2010 April 8–10 Workshop. Durham, North Carolina: Divers Alert Network. ISBN   978-0-615-54812-8 . Retrieved 24 May 2016.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.