|
| Site Partners: | SpotterGuides | Veloce Books |
| Related Sites: | Your Link Here |
|
|
|||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
|
24 Apr 2002, 23:10 (Ref:269894)
|
#51 | ||
|
Veteran
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 5,449
 |
Why wouldn't it go before a court? Not suggesting it will, but there is nothing to stop that happening if either of themfelt CAMS didn't/don't handle it the way they believe it should.
It simply then becomes a civil matter, not a CAMS matter. Chance of success is a different story however. Take a scenario - CAMS finds Murphy guilty of causing the accident, GRM could then, conceivably, take civil action to recover the cost of the car based on the CAMS finding (which has no power to award costs or damages) |
||
|
|
|
24 Apr 2002, 23:59 (Ref:269912)
|
#52 | ||
|
Racer
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 222
|
Under what precedent? There is no law actually being broken here. Put the moral outrage aside and think about what really happened here. IF Cams found a breach of there own rules or sporting code, it does not automatically qualify as a matter for a civil court.
Of course, under our crazy common law idea, where anything is possible for the right amount of money, a reeaally good QC might get something like "intent to cause bodily harm" a fair hearing, bit any competent defence would shoot it down as "part of the game". It would be a bit like putting a speed camera on Conrod Straight. Or charging a rugby player with assault & battery. |
||
|
|
__________________
"If you have a ten dollar head, then wear a ten dollar helmet!" - Frank Matich
|
|
25 Apr 2002, 00:09 (Ref:269916)
|
#53 | ||
|
Veteran
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 5,449
|
Re-read the scenario I suggested - I said nothing about bodily harm or the like - I stated that an action to recover costs ie the cost of damage to the car - would be quite conceivable simply because the CAMS structure has no methodology or rules currently in place to awrd this type of penalty. Any penalty CAMS can dish out goes back to CAMS.
GRM could take out a civil action at any time they want if they were after recovery of damage costs - they wouldn't have to wait for *any* CAMS ruling - there is nothing to stop that. If, however, a CAMS hearing or inquiry found that another car caused or contributed to the accident causing the damage, then GRM have a solid foundation on which to then sue successfully. This wouldn't be the first time it was done, either. But, all of this is pure speculation as nothing has, at this stage AFAIK, been proposed. |
||
|
|
|
|
25 Apr 2002, 01:27 (Ref:269962)
|
#54 | ||
|
Racer
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 222
|
Fascinating concept of damages recovery. For it to be granted, a civil court has to have evidence of a wrongdoing of some sort. Otherwise it comes under the "sh** happens" ruling.
Do you know of any successful cases. Litigation fascinates me in a sort of morbid way. |
||
|
|
__________________
"If you have a ten dollar head, then wear a ten dollar helmet!" - Frank Matich
|
|
25 Apr 2002, 01:36 (Ref:269969)
|
#55 | ||
|
Veteran
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 5,449
|
Not in Australia - although I seem to recall something about a case recently.
And yes - wrongdoing has to be proven and that was why I suggested that *if* (in this case) Murphy had been found guilty by CAMS, then a strong case could possibly be mounted. |
||
|
|
|
|
25 Apr 2002, 10:56 (Ref:270214)
|
#56 | ||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,622
|
It has happened in Australia before, at Warwick Farm in the 60's a car got written off in an accident and the victim successfully sued the other driver and won!
Another driver in the 50's was sued for an accident that killed several spectators and lost everything he owned. Last edited by Morris 1100; 25 Apr 2002 at 10:57. |
||
|
|
|
|
25 Apr 2002, 11:09 (Ref:270220)
|
#57 | |||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 2,417
|
Quote:
Gunslinger no I don't give up just like the majority of country men trying immigrate to our country 
Last edited by Amaroo Park; 25 Apr 2002 at 11:10. |
|||
|
|
__________________
BAZINGA!
|
|
25 Apr 2002, 11:12 (Ref:270223)
|
#58 | ||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 9,208
|
From: The surgery of DR Eric Dowker
- there there, there there 
|
||
|
|
__________________
Love you long time
|
|
25 Apr 2002, 15:55 (Ref:270447)
|
#59 | ||
|
Racer
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 222
|
Amazing stuff about those law suits from teh 50's. And I thought the Italians were mad for trying to get Williams on Senna's death.
But then again they still accept the concept of the vendetta as a legitimate defence for murder. |
||
|
|
__________________
"If you have a ten dollar head, then wear a ten dollar helmet!" - Frank Matich
|
|
25 Apr 2002, 19:36 (Ref:270662)
|
#60 | ||
|
Racer
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 248
|
It would be crazy. Similar to Willaims being taken to court for manslaughter.
If Williams were found guilty, it would've been the end of F1 as we know it. Same goes for Supercars. If you could sue everytime there's a smash (and someone, somewhere, is to blame EVERY time) it would be the end of the show. (I'm pleased you edited your little message up there Bond.) |
||
|
|
__________________
"The most fun you can have with your pants on!" Possum Bourne.
|
|
25 Apr 2002, 23:03 (Ref:270773)
|
#61 | |||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 2,417
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
|
__________________
BAZINGA!
|
|
26 Apr 2002, 01:14 (Ref:270814)
|
#62 | ||
|
Racer
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 248
|
|
||
|
|
__________________
"The most fun you can have with your pants on!" Possum Bourne.
|
 |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Tripple Eight acquire Briggs Motorsport Level 1 Franchise | RaceTime | Australasian Touring Cars. | 15 | 15 Sep 2003 12:54 |
| Bargwanna's EL | Champ69 | Australasian Touring Cars. | 5 | 22 Mar 2003 01:33 |
| Sad News - 'Dick' (Richard Twist) | Jim Lamb | Marshals Forum | 4 | 6 Jan 2003 19:48 |
Linear Mode
