|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Duty to rescue |
A duty to rescue is a concept in tort law that arises in a narrow number of cases, describing a circumstance in which a party can be held liable for failing to come to the rescue of another party in peril.
Contents |
In the common law of the United States, there is no general duty to come to the rescue of another.1 Generally, a person cannot be held liable for doing nothing while another person is in peril.23 However, such a duty may arise in two situations:
Where a duty to rescue arises, the rescuer must generally act with reasonable care, and can be held liable for injuries caused by a reckless rescue attempt. However, many states have limited or removed liability from rescuers in such circumstances, particularly where the rescuer is an emergency worker. Furthermore, the rescuer need not endanger himself in conducting the rescue.
In an 1898 case, the New Hampshire Supreme Court unanimously held that after an eight year old boy negligently placed his hand in the defendant's machinery, the boy had no right to be rescued by the defendant. Beyond that, the trespassing boy could be held liable for damages to the defendant's machine.11
Unlike the United States, many European civil law systems provide a far more extensive duty to rescue.3 Any person above legal age, who sees another human being in peril, must take all reasonable steps to provide help.citation needed The only exclusion is that the person must not endanger her/his own life or that of others, while providing rescue.
In theory,neutrality disputed this can mean that if a person finds someone in need of medical help, she/he must take all reasonable steps to seek medical care. Commonly the situation arises on an event of a traffic accident: other drivers and passers-by must take an action to help the injured without regard to possible personal reasons not to help (e.g. having no time, being in hurry) or ascertain that help has been requested from officials.citation needed In practice however, almost all cases of compulsory rescue simply require the rescuer to alert the relevant entity (police, fire brigade, ambulance) with a phone call.citation needed
In some countries, there exists a legal requirement for citizens to assist people in distress, unless doing so would put themselves in harm's way. Citizens are often required to, at minimum, call the local emergency number, unless doing so would be harmful, in which case the authorities should be contacted when the harmful situation has been removed. Such laws currently exist in several countries1 such as Albania, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia,12 Czech Republic, Finland, France,13 Germany,14 Greece, Hungary, Italy, The Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Russia, Spain, and Switzerland.
The photographers at the scene of Princess Diana's fatal car accident were investigated for violation of the French law of "non-assistance à personne en danger" (deliberately failing to provide assistance to a person in danger), which can be punished by up to 5 years of jail time and a fine of up to 100,000 €.
In Germany, "Unterlassene Hilfeleistung" (neglect of duty to provide assistance) is an offense; a citizen is obliged to provide first aid when necessary and is immune from prosecution if assistance given in good faith turns out to be harmful. Also the helper may not be held responsible if the action he should take in order to help is unacceptable for him and he is unable to act (for example dealing with blood). In Germany, knowledge of basic emergency measures is a prerequisite for the granting of a driving license.
In Quebec, which falls under civil law, there is a general duty to rescue in its Charter of Rights: "Every human being whose life is in peril has a right to assistance...Every person must come to the aid of anyone whose life is in peril, either personally or calling for aid, by giving him the necessary and immediate physical assistance, unless it involves danger to himself or a third person, or he has another valid reason."15 The legal context is quite different from France and Germany however; criminal law in Canada is under the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal government, so failure to comply with an article of the Charter in Quebec does not constitute a criminal offense unless that by doing so a party also violates the Criminal Code of Canada.
Other provinces follow common law.
(links added, citations removed)As a general rule, our common law imposes no duty to prevent a third person from causing physical injury to another.... Additionally, under the public duty doctrine, the State is not liable for its negligent conduct even where a duty does exist unless the duty was owed to the injured person and not merely the public in general.... However, this court recognizes an exception to both these general rules. [A] duty arises where 'a special relation exists between the actor and the third person which imposes a duty upon the actor to control the third person's conduct.' [Therefore,] we have adopted one class of these 'special relation' cases as described in section 319: "One who takes charge of a third person whom he knows or should know to be likely to cause bodily harm to others if not controlled is under a duty to exercise reasonable care to control the third person to prevent him from doing such harm."
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
