Notwithstanding that the only other lawyer on this thread who put his head above the parapet and tried to talk sense got beaten on for his trouble, I'll throw in my five cents.
- validity of a waiver depends upon the laws of the relevant jurisdiction. In England they are unenforceable for personal injury or death, and are subject to a reasonableness requirement in all other cases (ie. property damage and economic loss). In the British Virgin Islands, they are completely enforceable (and thus de rigeur amongst dive companies).
- it is a common misconception (certainly in all the jurisdictions that I practise in) that a person's liability increases if they receive payment for the service you render. Generally speaking, the duty of care to another person does not vary whether they are paying or not. The law generally requires people to take reasonable care - no more, no less. Now, if someone is paying for a service, they may have collateral claims that may (for example) have longer limitation periods or difference measures of damages (like they may potentially be able claim breaches of implied terms), but generally they owe no higher duty.
- there is a lot of advice having been posted that you should either 'get insurance' or ensure you are covered by insurance. A word of caution. In pretty much any lawsuit you hear of, the claimants make a bee-line for the deepest pockets. If you are a regular joe who has taken some friends out on your boat, unless you happen to be particularly rich, you don't make a very tempting target for the ambulance chasers. However, if you happen to have liability cover, all of a sudden for their purposes you have very deep pockets indeed.
As a last general observation, I take the tips and advice that are posted on this message board about diving with a grain of salt. It would freeze over in hell before I turned to a scuba diving message board for reliable legal advice.
OK, feel free to resume the lawyer bashing now.
- validity of a waiver depends upon the laws of the relevant jurisdiction. In England they are unenforceable for personal injury or death, and are subject to a reasonableness requirement in all other cases (ie. property damage and economic loss). In the British Virgin Islands, they are completely enforceable (and thus de rigeur amongst dive companies).
- it is a common misconception (certainly in all the jurisdictions that I practise in) that a person's liability increases if they receive payment for the service you render. Generally speaking, the duty of care to another person does not vary whether they are paying or not. The law generally requires people to take reasonable care - no more, no less. Now, if someone is paying for a service, they may have collateral claims that may (for example) have longer limitation periods or difference measures of damages (like they may potentially be able claim breaches of implied terms), but generally they owe no higher duty.
- there is a lot of advice having been posted that you should either 'get insurance' or ensure you are covered by insurance. A word of caution. In pretty much any lawsuit you hear of, the claimants make a bee-line for the deepest pockets. If you are a regular joe who has taken some friends out on your boat, unless you happen to be particularly rich, you don't make a very tempting target for the ambulance chasers. However, if you happen to have liability cover, all of a sudden for their purposes you have very deep pockets indeed.
As a last general observation, I take the tips and advice that are posted on this message board about diving with a grain of salt. It would freeze over in hell before I turned to a scuba diving message board for reliable legal advice.
OK, feel free to resume the lawyer bashing now.