or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › General Skiing Discussion › "Ski Buddy" Lawsuit, Are we liable for others in the BC?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

"Ski Buddy" Lawsuit, Are we liable for others in the BC? - Page 2

post #31 of 39

Following that line of reasoning isn't the company negligent for allowing any unqualified skiers (potentially defective "ski buddies") to heli ski.  Is it negligence for the company to allow a 110 lb. women to heli ski because she cannot pull a 260 lb. guy out of a tree well if the occasion arises?  The guy screwed up by falling in a tree well, but it was not his fault he died?  If you are not willing to take responsibility for your own actions then you shouldn't ski, period.  I have been heli skiing a few times and I can assure you there are many rich a-holes who are skiing with no concern for anyone but themselves.  When people pay $10,000 or more for a week of skiing some of them tend to feel entitled to get their turns, even at the expense of others.   Welcome to the real world.

post #32 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by mudfoot View Post
 

Following that line of reasoning isn't the company negligent for allowing any unqualified skiers (potentially defective "ski buddies") to heli ski.  Is it negligence for the company to allow a 110 lb. women to heli ski because she cannot pull a 260 lb. guy out of a tree well if the occasion arises?  The guy screwed up by falling in a tree well, but it was not his fault he died?  If you are not willing to take responsibility for your own actions then you shouldn't ski, period.  I have been heli skiing a few times and I can assure you there are many rich a-holes who are skiing with no concern for anyone but themselves.  When people pay $10,000 or more for a week of skiing some of them tend to feel entitled to get their turns, even at the expense of others.   Welcome to the real world.


It always comes back to what is reasonable, what is normal risk for a given activity.  If the heli company does its due diligence and operates in what is considered a "normal" manner it's hard to get anything because it IS a risky activity and there are waivers.  You have to be able to prove serious negligence to be able to get something out of them.  In this case, as the judge said, it was unfortunate but nothing where damages should be awarded.  Frivolous lawsuits..nothing new..

post #33 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldgoat View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Castle Dave View Post

 
It is unfortunate this case reinforces some nasty American stereotypes. My bet is that neither she nor her lawyer are avid skiers. I hope she will be charged for all expenses incurred in filing this lawsuit especially the defendant's. What a waste of my Canadian judicial system!
Canadians file lawsuits too. http://www.piquenewsmagazine.com/whistler/claims-against-kicking-horse-resort-dropped-in-backcountry-lawsuit/Content?oid=2264886

Glad to hear the results of that one.
post #34 of 39

The sweep system makes sense. A couple of years ago my son and I skied with a guide in a group of strangers and the guide appointed one of the stronger skiers in the group to sweep. Last year my other son and I did the same thing. We skied the normal route on the Vallee Blanche in a group that contained 3 very weak and unfit skiers. The guide asked us to let the weak skiers go first after him but it was impossible not to pass them. I appointed myself to sweep on the most difficult section, and waited for twenty minutes while they tried to negotiate a slightly uphill traverse across a 45 degree firm face leading to the Requin hut, while the guide dug in his edges below the track in case one of them came off. When we reached the Mer de Glace, which is nearly flat it was every man for himself--no one wanted to go slow behind these folks and have to pole their way down the glacier. Unfortunately when we got to to stairs up to the Montenvers lift we realized that the three had gone the wrong way down the glacier and past us. The guide took off down the glacier. I found out later all turned out well--none of the three wound up in a crevasse, although I'm sure they had an exhausting time climbing up out of the glacier and skiing the narrow rocky track back to Chamonix. 

post #35 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldgoat View Post
 

The sweep system makes sense.

Again, not to be contrarian and I do appreciate what you're saying, but if you're paying money to go out there, you're a very good human being to sacrifice your time to be a sweeper for others.  It may be the guiding should involve 2 guides, front and back..and THEY can do the sweeping.  I mean, good on ya for taking care and watching out for the weaker skiers, I did the same thing motorcycling..but they're kinda relying on your good will, something that won't always be there.  What would the cost be?  Would anyone do it?  Tough call.

post #36 of 39

A parent can be held accountable for the safety and well being of a child but unless some sort of Canadian statute exists stating that one adult is responsible for another I do not see a court finding liability. It would seem to me that each skier would generally have equal knowledge of skiing as it pertains to skills required and inherent risks involved.

   There are always exception depending on circumstances such as an individual failing to report a dangerous situation and I suppose they could be held partially negligent but unless they are found to be party to causation it seem like a far stretch to me that you could develop a case for proximate cause based on just being in the same location.

   Probably a good thing that the court is rendering a decision rather than a jury.    

post #37 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott43 View Post
 

Again, not to be contrarian and I do appreciate what you're saying, but if you're paying money to go out there, you're a very good human being to sacrifice your time to be a sweeper for others.  It may be the guiding should involve 2 guides, front and back..and THEY can do the sweeping.  I mean, good on ya for taking care and watching out for the weaker skiers, I did the same thing motorcycling..but they're kinda relying on your good will, something that won't always be there.  What would the cost be?  Would anyone do it?  Tough call.

I'm either going to ski ahead and have to stop and wait for them, or ski behind, wait and let them get far enough ahead. Either way I wait so nothing noble about it. I've also been the one being waited for.  That's the downside of joining a guided group of strangers--highly variable ability level. The upside--it's a lot cheaper. AT Chamonix the break even for a private guide is 4 skiers.  The worst part of that particular day was walking down the ridge to where you put skis on. 40 below windchill, the easier of the two paths was closed, my son was first, I was second, the weaker skiers were behind us, and after being passed by dozens of people I finally had to start dragging them down the ridge. One guy was completely spent and had to lie down in the snow and we hadn't even put our skis on. BTW, the walk down the ridge is probably the hardest part of a day on the Vallee Blanche, unless you ski one of the harder variations. The path is usually very icy. There are ropes along the whole path once the ski season starts and a guide will usually rope his clients to him. People do fall off and die. I was more worried that I'd slip and drop my skis--you'd never see them again if you did that.

post #38 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by mudfoot View Post
 

Following that line of reasoning isn't the company negligent for allowing any unqualified skiers (potentially defective "ski buddies") to heli ski.  Is it negligence for the company to allow a 110 lb. women to heli ski because she cannot pull a 260 lb. guy out of a tree well if the occasion arises?  The guy screwed up by falling in a tree well, but it was not his fault he died?  If you are not willing to take responsibility for your own actions then you shouldn't ski, period.  I have been heli skiing a few times and I can assure you there are many rich a-holes who are skiing with no concern for anyone but themselves.  When people pay $10,000 or more for a week of skiing some of them tend to feel entitled to get their turns, even at the expense of others.   Welcome to the real world.

 

The operator was not sued because of the liability waiver. If they had a potential case against the operator, they would have sued the operator. 
post #39 of 39

A friend of mine was heliskiing. He fell headfirst into deep powder and was having a lot of trouble getting up. The guy who was supposed to be his buddy skied past him and let him struggle. He did eventually get out. The guide was not pleased. 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Skiing Discussion
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › General Skiing Discussion › "Ski Buddy" Lawsuit, Are we liable for others in the BC?