2 dead & 6 injured as teens take after hours sled ride down Winsport bobsleigh track

[Since1984]

Wouldn't this be almost completely comparable to a person that jumps a fence to get in to a zoo and then jumps another fence to get close to a tiger cage and then the Tiger killing him?

Both parties are trespassing in areas that are considered dangerous.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Raekwon

I don't think people think they should sue they are just stating how and why they can. When you are in an industry that deals with these situations you become very jaded. If people can get money they will 9 times out of 10. I get angry just thinking about it, I need to go to my happy place.

I betcha there's lots of calgary lawyers locking their chops at this one.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Raekwon

I don't think people think they should sue they are just stating how and why they can. When you are in an industry that deals with these situations you become very jaded. If people can get money they will 9 times out of 10. I get angry just thinking about it, I need to go to my happy place.

Exactly.

I honestly don't know if they should or shouldn't sue, because I don't know what the standard of care should be in this situation. It's just that to me, you have this cool as hell slide in a populated area and then a measly 7' climbable fence to keep people out.

I mean, if I were to build a big pit in the middle of a city and surrounded it with a fence that people could easily negotiate through, I am sure that there would be a liability issue there.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

I mean, if I were to build a big pit in the middle of a city and surrounded it with a fence that people could easily negotiate through, I am sure that there would be a liability issue there.

Doesn't that describe virtually every construction site in the world?

[T@T]

Originally Posted by Since1984

Wouldn't this be almost completely comparable to a person that jumps a fence to get in to a zoo and then jumps another fence to get close to a tiger cage and then the Tiger killing him?

Both parties are trespassing in areas that are considered dangerous.

Except a man eating Tiger doesn't resemble a fun slide down a track made of ice.

I have no problem putting all the blame on the kids if there was a danger sign saying the track was closed by an obstruction part way down but there wasn't.

Trespassing for a little fun or otherwise isn't and shouldn't be a death sentence. Try boobie trapping your house to kill a burglar and see what happens!

People are going to get paid a lot of money over this...we may never hear about, but it will happen.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by T@T

Except a man eating Tiger doesn't resemble a fun slide down a track made of ice.

I have no problem putting all the blame on the kids if there was a danger sign saying the track was closed by an obstruction part way down but there wasn't.

Trespassing for a little fun or otherwise isn't and shouldn't be a death sentence. Try boobie trapping your house to kill a burglar and see what happens!

People are going to get paid a lot of money over this...we may never hear about, but it will happen.

Do you know this is a fact? They could easily have ignored it, or perhaps started below the start shed.

[savemedrzaius]

Originally Posted by T@T

Except a man eating Tiger doesn't resemble a fun slide down a track made of ice.

I have no problem putting all the blame on the kids if there was a danger sign saying the track was closed by an obstruction part way down but there wasn't.

Trespassing for a little fun or otherwise isn't and shouldn't be a death sentence. Try boobie trapping your house to kill a burglar and see what happens!

People are going to get paid a lot of money over this...we may never hear about, but it will happen.

Yeah, but they are cute and cuddly.

[speede5]

Originally Posted by T@T

Except a man eating Tiger doesn't resemble a fun slide down a track made of ice.

I have no problem putting all the blame on the kids if there was a danger sign saying the track was closed by an obstruction part way down but there wasn't.

Trespassing for a little fun or otherwise isn't and shouldn't be a death sentence. Try boobie trapping your house to kill a burglar and see what happens!

People are going to get paid a lot of money over this...we may never hear about, but it will happen.

That would probably make them more liable, as they are acknowledging the danger without preventing access.

I've heard the same for a beware of dog sign, it can imply you know the animal has the potential to cause injury so your duty of care goes up.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by getbak

Doesn't that describe virtually every construction site in the world?

Except I don't think a construction site is enticing like bobsled track. But even in that situation, the fence surrounding a construction site has to be more than just a minor inconvenience to get through. And I doubt too many kids brag about that time they snuck onto a construction site.

There are cases where people have been sued when trespassers were injured on construction sites if it is shown that the measure to secure the site were not enough. It all comes down to reasonable duty of care. To me, a 7' fence (assuming it is just straight chain link) is a pretty borderline measure. Most people between 5' to 6' in height can probably climb a fence like that easily enough that it probably wouldn't be a deterrent.

[PepsiFree]

Based on this:

http://www.qp.alberta.ca/documents/acts/o04.pdf

It appears that they would have no grounds to sue because they give up their right to duty of care as trespassers. They would have to prove that just the existence of the Bobsled track is determined to be "reckless conduct."

As has been said. This isn't the US. Even in the US there are states where trespassers get nothing, period, but most sue in situations where the property owner acted in a purposeful or careless way as to specifically cause enjoy.

Interesting to note: NO states allow a trespasser to collect damages in a scenario where they proceed to do a knowably dangerous activity. It is not up to the property owner to protect them from undertaking a knowably dangerous activity.

[dubc80]

There was examples of people going over the weir on the Bow River and drowning. Did they or could they of ended up filing a suit against the City of Calgary? Would this be a similar example?

I guess the difference here is that they have signs like this which may be a higher standard than what Winsport had. Not sure, haven't seen the signs there though.



I think they should just put a 9' concrete wall around the whole river though, just to be sure no one uses the weir improperly without training and equipment and dies.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by T@T

Except a man eating Tiger doesn't resemble a fun slide down a track made of ice.

I have no problem putting all the blame on the kids if there was a danger sign saying the track was closed by an obstruction part way down but there wasn't.

Trespassing for a little fun or otherwise isn't and shouldn't be a death sentence. Try boobie trapping your house to kill a burglar and see what happens!

People are going to get paid a lot of money over this...we may never hear about, but it will happen.

The Park was closed, so they shouldn't be there anyways. In a way, you're right and you're wrong.

A little trespassing shouldn't be a death sentence, however its pretty common sense and knowledge that the track is dangerous, that's why when you do go down it its supervised and the conditions are controlled.

And, and I hate to be glib, but they broke in to take a toboggan ride basically down a Olympic venue that even professionals struggle with. I'm sorry they got hurt, and I'm really sorry that some of them died. But being stupid shouldn't be a excuse to sue.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by VladtheImpaler

I am not going to debate this, since I do this for a living, but I will say again - the trespassing is irrelevant.

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Based on this:

http://www.qp.alberta.ca/documents/acts/o04.pdf

It appears that they would have no grounds to sue because they give up their right to duty of care as trespassers. They would have to prove that just the existence of the Bobsled track is determined to be "reckless conduct."

As has been said. This isn't the US. Even in the US there are states where trespassers get nothing, period, but most sue in situations where the property owner acted in a purposeful or careless way as to specifically cause enjoy.

Interesting to note: NO states allow a trespasser to collect damages in a scenario where they proceed to do a knowably dangerous activity. It is not up to the property owner to protect them from undertaking a knowably dangerous activity.

Based on the guy that does it for a living.....it doesn't matter.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

Based on the guy that does it for a living.....it doesn't matter.

Didn't see that, thanks.

Law pretty clearly says it does though, so I'd be curious to hear why not.

If the trespassing doesn't matter... would an employee be able to go down the track on a sled without protection or permission, hurt themselves, and sue?

[FlamesAddiction]

If you Google "Can trespassers sue", there are numerous examples of it happening. I don't have the desire to weed through them all to find close comparisons or research jurisdictions, but it seems to be possible for trespassers to sue for negligence, but I don't think it's a given that they will win. There are probably a lot of factors at play.

One difference I read is that if an obstacle has to be altered in some way by the trespassers for them to gain entry (like cutting a fence, breaking a locked gate, etc.), then it protects the property owner more than something that that just has to be avoided (like a short fence or jersey barrier). That was a British source though, so I don't know if Alberta is the same.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by VladtheImpaler

Based on the information I have learned in THIS THREAD ONLY (I have not, nor will I, do any other research, unless there is a reason to), if I was representing the dead kids' next of kin, I think 75-80 (maybe more)% of the blame for their death would rest with COP. The gate IS a death trap, people slid down before, so they should have been aware of the possibility, it doesn't sound like there was any signage warning of the barricade. Per the Occupiers Liability Act, it is irrelevant if they were trespassers or invitees. Slava I think brought up the example of the barbed wire/snowmobile case, and I think that is exactly on point. They have created a trap on their property, and have not made adequate provision to safeguard visitors. The standard of care is "what would a reasonable person do" - I would think, given the danger, padding on the barricade, signage warning of the barricade on top would be two things that were lacking.
I am sorry to get into legal analysis here, and again this is just my opinion, based on no information, other than what I have seen here.

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Didn't see that, thanks.

Law pretty clearly says it does though, so I'd be curious to hear why not.

If the trespassing doesn't matter... would an employee be able to go down the track on a sled without protection or permission, hurt themselves, and sue?

So Vlad, make a living representing people that have been injured. I am willing to accept his opinion. I would suspect he bases it on years of experience with the judiciary.

[Duruss]

Originally Posted by dubc80

There was examples of people going over the weir on the Bow River and drowning. Did they or could they of ended up filing a suit against the City of Calgary? Would this be a similar example?

I think they should just put a 9' concrete wall around the whole river though, just to be sure no one uses the weir improperly without training and equipment and dies.

The weir is effing terrifying. I remember seeing the size of some of the logs caught in the flow and how the water was spinning them like nothing. I think going into that would be like going into the rock crusher in Temple of Doom.

[Raekwon]

Next time an ambulance drives by just watch for Vlad he isn't too far behind, ask him then.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Raekwon

Next time an ambulance drives by just watch for Vlad he isn't too far behind, ask him then.

Shots Fired!

[Northendzone]

i for one appreciated hearing vlad take on this.

it will be interesitng to see if the families do anything and how it plays out