Australian landmark ruling makes pub responsible for death of drunk biker

[98tls]

Ummmm, This is NZ, not USA.....

Theres a difference?

[DingoZ]

Having been a licencee in Aus. I can attest to the amount of laws governing the "Responsible Service" of alchohol. There are provisions that must be met by the publican or the duty manager in regards to a "Duty of Care" for every patron that is partaking of the services at said establishment. There are also very harsh penalties if a publican or duty manager, or indeed bar staff, if they have been found to have continued to serve an intoxicated person, or said intoxicated person is found to be still on the premises, if the police do a spot check, without all reasonable measures to have said person removed from the premises in a safe manner.

Some of the "Reasonable measures"

1. Food must be able to be purchased at all times while alchohol is being served.
2. Use of the phone to call a taxi if requested, can not be refused. (Some pubs refuse to let patrons use the pub phone, rather they would make the patrons use a public phone).
3. Refusal of service for intoxicated persons. (And yes there were a set of indicators which the bar staff had to be aware of, so that they could tell if the person was intoxicated to the point for refusal of service, and which varied from person to person..)

I was lucky in some respects, as I ran a local country pub, where everyone knew and respected the rules, and the place that they chose to call their local. If they wanted to get tanked after a hard week at work. They used to come in and hand me the car keys, I would hand them a room key, as I had 10 or so rooms above the bar for guests and so forth. Or alternatively they got a ride home from one of my staff, and they came and picked up their keys from the pub the next day. Food was always available, no matter what time it was. And the bowls on the bar were never without bar snacks in them...

But having said all of the above. I believed then and still do now, that it is still an individuals choice to drink, and they should be held responsible for their actions, if they choose to drink to excess and then end up hurting themselves or indeed an innocent other party.

[quickbuck]

But having said all of the above. I believed then and still do now, that it is still an individuals choice to drink, and they should be held responsible for their actions, if they choose to drink to excess and then end up hurting themselves or indeed an innocent other party.

100% correct there.
It is sad we are now living in a society where it is always somebody else's fault.

98tls, you're right... even good ole NZ is going down this path... just like Merka did.... and as it seems Oz is too.

[FJRider]

100% correct there.
It is sad we are now living in a society where it is always somebody else's fault.

How many times after an accident/crash, the first words out of either mouth is ... not my fault...

If it is admitted at the time, the first minutes in court causes memory fade... I never said that...

If you lead your learner child on a motorcycle ride, on the motorway, at learner speeds... then realise it is dangerous... the LAW must be at fault for making it so...

[JohnnyBoston]

Australia pretty much does whatever America does, unlike N.Z., where we pretty much follow what the Brits do. Took a while for the Oz lawmakers to catch up with the States on this one, though... the 1st case of a pub being sued out of business there due to a drunk patron/driver fatality was back in the early 80`s.