Donated bench for residents use only - how to limit liability?

T

tedmundo

Registered User
Messages
10
My elderly neighbour donated a picnic bench to our shared green area of our estate so neighbours can sit and chat while the young kids play together, everyone is happy that the bench was added and it is used by all neighbors.

Someone suggested to my neighbor that he could be sued if someone into the bench or jumps off it and hurts themselves.

Can we add a sign "For Residents Use Only" to try and limit his liability or what should the sign say?

Thanks
 
Unless the elderly neighbour actually placed the bench themselves, they should have no liability assuming the bench itself is for for purpose.

Is this public land or a private development with a management company owning the communal spaces?
 
The estate has been taken over by the council so it would be public land, but all maintenance of the green area e.g. grass cutting and planting scrubs is done by the residents.

The neighbour did place the bench on the green area themselves but it is solid and fit for purpose.
 
Ideally you'd have the council's permission to install this on public property. I'd advise talking to them, they'll have a good understanding of safety requirements for furniture such as this.
 
Last edited:
Strictly speaking, the bench has been placed on public property without the permission of the local authority.

Whilst the bench would probably not constitute a piece of "street furniture" the litigious potential and the local authority mindset would probably make them take a disapprovingly self-protective attitude.:rolleyes:

As it stands, the bench seems to be no hazard at present. However, with the passage of time benches can deteriorate.
The more likely source of trouble is in the future if the bench becomes defective because nobody has carried out maintenance.
Who is going to be responsible for maintenance ?
 
DirectDevil said:
As it stands, the bench seems to be no hazard at present. However, with the passage of time benches can deteriorate.
The more likely source of trouble is in the future if the bench becomes defective because nobody has carried out maintenance.
Who is going to be responsible for maintenance ?
Click to expand...
It's a picnic bench, what's the worst that can happen?

tedmundo said:
Can we add a sign "For Residents Use Only" to try and limit his liability or what should the sign say?
Click to expand...
Mention it to your local councillor. They should be able to sort it out.
 
T McGibney said:
It's a picnic bench, what's the worst that can happen?
Click to expand...
You'd think, but sadly we live in times where people successfully sue on a regular basis after the likes of tripping on a crack in the footpath. DCC alone pay out more than €10 million a year for injury claims.
 
Leo said:
You'd think, but sadly we live in times where people successfully sue on a regular basis after the likes of tripping on a crack in the footpath. DCC alone pay out more than €10 million a year for injury claims.
Click to expand...
This isn't a crack in the footpath though. Is someone really going to sue if they end up with a splinter in their bum? Or if they lose a morsel of food between a crack in the table?
 
T McGibney said:
This isn't a crack in the footpath though. Is someone really going to sue if they end up with a splinter in their bum? Or if they lose a morsel of food between a crack in the table?
Click to expand...
Well, wasn't there a recent case of two adult women suing for injuries obtained while messing on a child's swing in a public park?

www.irishtimes.com

Two women injured while getting off child’s swing in separate incidents lose damages claim

Judge says ‘common sense’ would tell any adult they should not use swing for children
www.irishtimes.com www.irishtimes.com

Admittedly they lost the case, but that's not to say a case of injury while using a picnic bench may not succeed, or in any event tie up a lot of court time and money.
 
Buddyboy said:
Well, wasn't there a recent case of two adult women suing for injuries obtained while messing on a child's swing in a public park?

www.irishtimes.com

Two women injured while getting off child’s swing in separate incidents lose damages claim

Judge says ‘common sense’ would tell any adult they should not use swing for children
www.irishtimes.com www.irishtimes.com

Admittedly they lost the case, but that's not to say a case of injury while using a picnic bench may not succeed, or in any event tie up a lot of court time and money.
Click to expand...
Adults messing on swings is one thing, but on a picnic table????

Maybe cut down all the trees in the estate in case someone ends up climbing it???
 
T McGibney said:
This isn't a crack in the footpath though. Is someone really going to sue if they end up with a splinter in their bum? Or if they lose a morsel of food between a crack in the table?
Click to expand...
Trips and falls in parks are high up on the list of claims.

People can and do claim successfully for things like this.
 
T McGibney said:
I don't see how this cut-and-dried product liability claim against a major retailer of garden products is in any way comparable to what we're discussing here.
Click to expand...
The owners of the premises on which the faulty bench was located admitted joint liability for their failure to ensure the bench was safe. An unmaintained bench in a public space will eventually fail.
 
T McGibney said:
Yet you said, only last Thursday.
Click to expand...
Well, it turns out they did place it there themselves without the property owners permission, and so who do you think bears the responsibility for ensuring it remains safe and fit for purpose?
 
T McGibney said:
It's a picnic bench, what's the worst that can happen?
Click to expand...

Presently, probably nothing.

However, if the structure becomes defective - for whatever reason - and someone is injured there is going to be a problem arising from failure to maintain and or repair. Fault would have to be proven on the particular facts.

On first principles, how would a judge look at a case arising from the above scenario ?
There are 4 basic tests ;

Q1. Is there a duty of care owed to users of the [now] defective bench ?

This is a question of law decided by reference to the evidence.

Following the "neighbour" principle set out in Donoghue -v- Stevenson (1932) I would answer that in the affirmative. i.e. is the injured party someone whom you ought reasonably to have in contemplation as being so affected when you are directing your mind to the acts or omissions now being called in to question.

BTW if a judge decided that no duty of care was owed the case dies at that point.

Q2. Has there been a breach of that duty of care on the facts ?.
Q3. Has the plaintiff suffered loss and damage ?
Q4. Is the defendant's negligence the proximate cause of the plaintiff's injuries ?

Qs 2,3 and 4 are issues of fact answered on the basis of the specific evidence in the case.

Sorry if this sounds like a simple short story converted to "War and Peace" ! However, I hope that you might see how convoluted things can become if there is an accident and why people run for legal cover these days even before there is an accident i.e. hyper-neurotic risk averseness !

BTW, if the ownership of the bench was assigned to the residents' association that might help but could actually create other potential problems that we need not bother about today !!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top