Who is right?Who is wrong?

[badaveil]

My thought flash back to the unfortunate case where a child died playing in the compound of an oxidation pond and if I'm not mistaken not securely locked and where a another kid died swimming in a rain-flooded portion of an incomplete premise after sneeking through the fencing. In future, there could also be similar cases:

In a hypothetical case, if a child left the security of home to play outside on his own and wandered to a premise that happened not be be securely locked [who knows some side panels or loose boards here and there] and if he met an unfortunate death, who's responsible for that? The family or the owner of that premise? :confused:

[pcyeoh]

I would place the liability on the owner of the premise though not squarely. So if the parents should sue, the award will be apportioned. The owner cannot leave his premise unsecured especially when he knows how dangerous his premise is. That is why we cannot booby trap our house to make it buglar proof for even if a man intrudes into the premise and gets himself injured, we will be liable for injury caused to him inspite of what he did is wrong in law. This is fair or else our surrounding which is not maintained well will be a death trap to us and our children.

[badaveil]

pcyeoh

Yes, I see your point but in the first place, if the parents had kept an eye on their kid, there were not have been a need to put liability on the owner of that premise at all.