For the moderator or other legal experts. Reading the story about the Tequila drinking contest, and its tragic results, brings to mind some questions. Can the owners of the Bar be sued in Civil Court for their actions? Is there such a thing in this country? Also if someone falls in one of the many open holes present in the streets and sidewalks of the city, can you sue the city or the shop keeper whoses sidewalk you're crossing. What are the laws and standards for negligence and civil law suits in this country? Just some general info would be appreciated.
- Thread starter Naufrago
- Start date
Civil Law Suit Questions
Regardless of the legal aspect of it, why would the bar owners be sued? Were any of the victims minors? Were they made to drink?Naufrago said:
If any laws were broken then I am all for criminal prosecution, as it is all I see is two posthumous nomination to the Darwin Awards. :tired:
In the US, a bar owner can be held liable if he/she knowingly, continues to intoxicate someone whose looped, and that person gets into his car and kills someone. "Dram Shop Laws", don't know the current status of those cases but this instance seems worse. I think it Criminal to have a contest like that, I guess the owners wouldn't want me on that jury. But, they don't have juries here do they? Only judges appointed by the wealthy and connected business owners by their political puppets.
Last edited:
Well, just as the US and DR have different legal systems we two have different views on the subject. I don't want to be protected from myself (with very few exceptions) by the government. Those kids chose to do something very stupid, something any person with an ounce of common sense ought to know was dangerous.
As I said, if there was any criminal action on the part of the bar owner I hope he is prosecuted, I just don't see what that would be.
As I said, if there was any criminal action on the part of the bar owner I hope he is prosecuted, I just don't see what that would be.
Let's not get on that slippery slope. It is one thing to serve drinks in a place that has a license to do so another is to hand a loaded gun to somebody without a permit to have it. Not quite the same thing.Naufrago said:
I know where you are coming from too, I am also troubled by that idea, it was a VERY stupid idea on the part of the owners, but been stupid is not against the law. As I said, if they actually broke a law they should be prosecuted, I am just unsure there is actually any law against that. Maybe assisting a suicide?
Okay so I think we agree now, my question is about civil liability, not criminal. People pay out money every day to cover the damages created by their stupidity. Especially when they're making money directly realted to those damages. At least give the family of the dead and injured the profits from that night of stupidity, would that be fair?
Well the thing is, and I could be hugely wrong here, that you have to prove that they owners acted criminally or in breach of a contract to sue in civil court. It doesn't quite work the same way as in the US. Of course I will bow to anyone with actual knowledge of the law.Naufrago said:
And I disagree with you that the families of the victims should receive compensation should it be found that the bar owners acted in accordance with the law.
Maybe I should have posted this in the debate section. So is Breach of Contract the only actionable cause in Dominican Courts? Are you saying that here there is no standard of negligence that is actionable in Civil Court? That's what I don't know and that's the question that I'm asking.
The bar never broke any laws and the adults signed a release.
Compensation in my books would be an admission of guilt in some way.
My guess is this will slowly slide out of the news and that will be it.
Mini rant
God forbid if this place ever gets like the USA and people start searching for bad kerbs stones to fall over or claim to be emotional scared for seeing someone less fortunate than them walking on the street.
At the end of the day most of us on DR1 are not in the USA, we are living as guests in the Dominican Republic. I'm 100% against foreigners attempting to inflict or indoctrinate their moral values on the system or it's people.
But... If you have any common sense going spare, please pass it out
Compensation in my books would be an admission of guilt in some way.
My guess is this will slowly slide out of the news and that will be it.
Mini rant
God forbid if this place ever gets like the USA and people start searching for bad kerbs stones to fall over or claim to be emotional scared for seeing someone less fortunate than them walking on the street.
At the end of the day most of us on DR1 are not in the USA, we are living as guests in the Dominican Republic. I'm 100% against foreigners attempting to inflict or indoctrinate their moral values on the system or it's people.
But... If you have any common sense going spare, please pass it out
Hey guys, you know I love you all, but I reiterate, This isn't the Debate Section. Is there someone here with a firm knowledge of the law that is telling me that there is no action for negligence or tortious behavior in the courts of this country, facts, not opinions, that's what I'm looking for. I'm not talking about breaking laws, that's criminal, I'm talking about wrongful and recoverable civil actions. Signed releases aren't always dispositive in other legal systems, any legal scholars out there?
Robert said:Mini rant
God forbid if this place ever gets like the USA and people start searching for bad kerbs stones to fall over or claim to be emotional scared for seeing someone less fortunate than them walking on the street.
Here here, already got my eye out for the next place to move to if this happens.
Yes, the owners can be sued, however it will be upto to the civil actors to prove and demonstrate how the bar, bar owners or bartenders, etc can be held responsible or liable for the incidents. Certainly it will not be easy for them to blame and find reasons enough to find any grounds for penal repression, since nobody forced the "drinkers" or obligated them into the drinking contest. The relative victims will get no more than a several million pesos indemnification for the loss and damage. To condemn the owners or others to jailtime or prison would be an outrage.
Is that fact based on actual laws or just your opinion? Obviously I am open to anyone's opinion, just making sure I don't take opionions for facts.Oche said:
Shoot! We have three lawyers on DR1? There goes the neighborhood.Oche said:
Back to the OP, wouldn't having signed some sort of release prove that the victims understood the risk they were taking and still went ahead?
As I said, based on the facts as we know it, on principle I am against any type of retributions. But the law is the law, and if there is any chance they could be prosecuted in a criminal court I wouldn't be opposed to it.
Pib said:Shoot! We have three lawyers on DR1? There goes the neighborhood.
I generally get offended by Lawyer Jokes, remember I started the thread "Don't Call me Gringo". But I must admit I had to stop practicing Law mainly because I could no longer stand working with Lawyers, around Lawyers, anywhere near Lawyers. I much rather prefer Social workers, Teachers, Preachers, and even Retailers. Lawyers are generally abrasive and argumentative, but that too is a generalization. Some of us are trying to reform our antisocial ways. :nervous:
I also have a hard time with Engineers in general, they seem think everything is so objective and knowable, I don't think so.
I know, I know, stay of topic... But I'm not the only offender in this thread...does the OP get any additional lattitude?
Pib said:
As I have said, I don't know the law in the DR. Back in the US a release dosen't mean too much. First I would argue that the guy was drunk when he signed and lacked the capacity to understand what he was signing. Then I might argue that the bar owners kept the lights dim and the print too small to actually read the thing. Also, I'd claim that the bars lawyer convulted the language to such an extent that he couldn't have understood what he was signing anyway. Furthermore the bar owners were encouraging, promoting and even offering to pay the winners, for an action so outrageous and dangerous (they after all are professionals in the bar business and should know the dangers) that their behavior approaches or maybe even is criminal, regardless of some signature on a piece of paper. I can sign a paper saying "go ahead shoot me". It dosn't mean you can kill me without being charged with a crime, or maybe here in the DR it does? You see the way the arguements can go. It's not black and white. There is always a lot of line drawing and individual facts that can only be brought out through investigation and trial. That's what the practice of law is all about. That and getting a third of the multi-million dollar settlement!
Last edited: