攀岩與法律

hank · 2003-06-11, 01:23

法律是保護懂法律的人!
C級以上教練課程應加入法律相關課程.
4~5年前我在北搜上課,因為任務是救難,法律課程相當重要,但我覺得C級教練也非常需要相關常識,以保護自己,因為攀岩一不小心造成的傷害相當大,前天的LaNew活動,抓蟲人(抓蟲人是誰?翻成英文就知道誰了)與我制止一位無確保遊客攀爬攀岩車,制止無效後,我與抓蟲人趕快搜證(人證,物證),該員於5m處無確保墜落,固定該員後送萬芳醫院急救,後續受傷情形我再問一下陪同就醫的護士再向各位報告.
以後陸陸續續會在辦相關課程,法律常識有其絕對的必要性.

DebugGuy · 2003-06-11, 01:23

Quote:

抓蟲人(抓蟲人是誰?翻成英文就知道誰了)

抓蟲人？ [img]images/forum/smilies/icon_confused.gif[/img]

挺彆扭的！
翻成英文還得用閩南語念才正確。

叫\"豬八哥\"也行。 [img]images/forum/smilies/

[/img]

說實話，當時我在現場真的不敢上去制止(拉他下來，當時傷者約爬3m高)，主要怕自己受傷，還當真的沒有想到如果當事者因而受傷會因此吃上官司。
第二是，真的呆了，除了在底下歇斯底里的亂吼亂叫外，並沒有在第一時間想出有效的制止方法。
更可惡的是，在其要墜落時(我已經發現其要墜落了)，居然眼睜睜的看著傷者無助的下墜。嗨，人性竟墮落到此地步，到現在還耿耿於懷。

不過，現在台灣社會慢慢向美國看齊了(請不要用泛政治化的眼光看這段文字，這是事實)，大家動不動就上法院和法官談天說地了。將來在攀岩教學的過程中，可能會遇上一些難以掌握的狀況，或許\會因此而惹上官司，固加強相關的法律常識，在現在及未來的社會中，或許\可做為保障自己的手段。
並非要去事後辯解，而是根據相關法律，事前預作防範，確保雙方的安全和權益，如現在登山活動都會投保意外險，即是如此。

眾攀岩者中，應不乏法律專家，尚請您不吝指教有關攀岩活動相關的法律常識，謝謝！
[addsig]

imported_Anonymous · 2003-06-11, 01:23

The following webpage offers some easy stuff to those who are interested in the US cases/laws related to outdoor activities: http://www.lawquarterly.com/. But please note that the US legal system is in general based on \"common law\", whose doctrines and operation are very different from the so-called \"statute law\" upon which Taiwan\'s legal system is strictly followed (perhaps some civil codes - \"ming fa\" - are exceptions?).
Such difference notwithstanding, I entirely agree with \"upstairs\", that Taiwan\'s climbing community should begin to pay adequate attention to legal isues involved in coaching, guiding, and other related liability issues. It\'s about the right time to do this. This US system is therefore a good reference to begin with.
I still cannot type Chinese onto this website. I have heard that OS X would solve this problem (I am using Mac, OS 9), so, please be understood that I am not writing English just to show off.
Ta-chi [img]images/forum/smilies/icon_wink.gif[/img]

DebugGuy · 2003-06-11, 01:23

Quote:

I still cannot type Chinese onto this website. I have heard that OS X would solve this problem (I am using Mac, OS 9)

Greate to heard this, hope to see your chinese message.

xie-pei[addsig]

imported_Anonymous · 2003-06-11, 01:23

Quote:

On 2003-05-26 18:12, hank wrote:
法律是保護懂法律的人!

以目前的情況而言,這句話是對的,法律條文規定的確有些噢口難懂,不過也因為如此才有專業法律人存在的必要吧

C級以上教練課程應加入法律相關課程.
4~5年前我在北搜上課,因為任務是救難,法律課程相當重要,但我覺得C級教練也非常需要相關常識,以保護自己,因為攀岩一不小心造成的傷害相當大,前天的LaNew活動,抓蟲人(抓蟲人是誰?翻成英文就知道誰了)與我制止一位無確保遊客攀爬攀岩車,制止無效後,我與抓蟲人趕快搜證(人證,物證),該員於5m處無確保墜落,固定該員後送萬芳醫院急救,後續受傷情形我再問一下陪同就醫的護士再向各位報告.
以後陸陸續續會在辦相關課程,法律常識有其絕對的必要性.

以上情形,民法第一百九十一條之三有\"危險製造人責任\"之相關規定:
經營一定事業或從事其他工作或活動之人，其工作或活動之性質或其使用之工具或方法有生損害於他人之危險者，對他人之損害應負賠償責任。但損害非由於其工作或活動或其使用之工具或方法所致，或於防止損害之發生已盡相當之注意者，不在此限。

由條文規定可知,危險製造人對於其活動或工作有一定之注意義務,以免造成他人損害.然而一味的只要求危險製造人負責,也是有失公允的,於是乎有但書的規定,使其可以免責;不過是否符合但書規定的\"已盡相當注意\",則可能需要一些證據,例如當時勸阻其不要再往上爬,是否有相關證人等等,這些都是非常重要的

[img]images/forum/smilies/icon_smile.gif[/img]

Ta-Chi · 2003-06-11, 01:23

Here in the US, participants of climbing (guiding, training, indoor or outdoor) will always be asked to sign a \"Waiver.\" (for those under 18, the parents must sign; it is a piece of paper signed by each and every individual) It basically states that the participants agree to observe the rules and instructions and acknowledge that there is \"inherent danger\" involved in climbing activity. The question is whether or not this \"waiver\" would serve in Taiwan to hedge a climber (especially a not-paid trainer) or a non-profit organization against injury-related legal responsibility?

In practice, most personnel in both commercialized or non-profit climbing activities will demand anyone violating the rules or any safety considerations to leave. This is done even without reinbursement if that activity is paid. For example, I have witnessed in an indoor gym here in Madison, one guy was using a Gri-Gri to belay but he did not hold his \"baking hand\" -- a common habit of Gri Gri users -- and the result was that he was expelled out of the gym after the personnel told him to do so (holding the rope with the braking hand) but he still failed to follow this rule.

Ta-Chi · 2003-06-11, 01:23

The following question from the previous case is whether or not such a \"demand of leave\" once issued by responsible personnel would serve in Taiwan as a cutoff between the incumbents and the participants in terms of legality? In the US, it is.

I think one of the reasons for this is that in the US, the concept of \"property rights\" is a well established doctrine. If I ask you to leave becuase you have violated the rules set forth by the \"contract,\" (a form of jointly owned property rights -- that is, by your signing the \"waiver\"), then it becomes your burden/responsibility if anything happens to you due to the fact that you have already disclaimed your property rights by breaching the contract.

This is just my interpretation, and it can be wrong. But does Taiwan\'s legal system have the similar doctrine like this such that we can prusue in order to have both sides (incumbents and participants) to become more aware of each other\'s responsibility and legal limits?

hank · 2003-06-11, 01:23

忘了向大家報告:
該員為法警,報名現場體驗攀岩,因過4:00截止時間而沒報上,活動截止後,該員突然像中邪(當事人說的)般的往上攀爬,也不理會旁人勸阻.
當事人右腳跟粉碎性骨折,左大腿骨折,脊椎擠壓.
不過當時因sars高峰期,該員又曾到過台大,因骨折而發燒,被疑為sars,後來經檢驗為非sars才轉入普通病房.[addsig]

2003-06-11, 01:23	#1
hank 攀言新手註冊日期: 2003-05 文章: 13	攀岩與法律法律是保護懂法律的人! C級以上教練課程應加入法律相關課程. 4~5年前我在北搜上課,因為任務是救難,法律課程相當重要,但我覺得C級教練也非常需要相關常識,以保護自己,因為攀岩一不小心造成的傷害相當大,前天的LaNew活動,抓蟲人(抓蟲人是誰?翻成英文就知道誰了)與我制止一位無確保遊客攀爬攀岩車,制止無效後,我與抓蟲人趕快搜證(人證,物證),該員於5m處無確保墜落,固定該員後送萬芳醫院急救,後續受傷情形我再問一下陪同就醫的護士再向各位報告. 以後陸陸續續會在辦相關課程,法律常識有其絕對的必要性. __________________ 我是大胖.HANK就是我在岩場不爬岩一直聊天的就是我 http://tw.myblog.yahoo.com/climbing-everest

2003-06-11, 01:23	#3
imported_Anonymous 攀岩癌症患者註冊日期: 2004-02 文章: 551	攀岩與法律 The following webpage offers some easy stuff to those who are interested in the US cases/laws related to outdoor activities: http://www.lawquarterly.com/. But please note that the US legal system is in general based on \"common law\", whose doctrines and operation are very different from the so-called \"statute law\" upon which Taiwan\'s legal system is strictly followed (perhaps some civil codes - \"ming fa\" - are exceptions?). Such difference notwithstanding, I entirely agree with \"upstairs\", that Taiwan\'s climbing community should begin to pay adequate attention to legal isues involved in coaching, guiding, and other related liability issues. It\'s about the right time to do this. This US system is therefore a good reference to begin with. I still cannot type Chinese onto this website. I have heard that OS X would solve this problem (I am using Mac, OS 9), so, please be understood that I am not writing English just to show off. Ta-chi [img]images/forum/smilies/icon_wink.gif[/img]

2003-06-11, 01:23	#6
Ta-Chi 輕度攀岩者註冊日期: 2003-05 文章: 77	攀岩與法律 Here in the US, participants of climbing (guiding, training, indoor or outdoor) will always be asked to sign a \"Waiver.\" (for those under 18, the parents must sign; it is a piece of paper signed by each and every individual) It basically states that the participants agree to observe the rules and instructions and acknowledge that there is \"inherent danger\" involved in climbing activity. The question is whether or not this \"waiver\" would serve in Taiwan to hedge a climber (especially a not-paid trainer) or a non-profit organization against injury-related legal responsibility? In practice, most personnel in both commercialized or non-profit climbing activities will demand anyone violating the rules or any safety considerations to leave. This is done even without reinbursement if that activity is paid. For example, I have witnessed in an indoor gym here in Madison, one guy was using a Gri-Gri to belay but he did not hold his \"baking hand\" -- a common habit of Gri Gri users -- and the result was that he was expelled out of the gym after the personnel told him to do so (holding the rope with the braking hand) but he still failed to follow this rule.

2003-06-11, 01:23	#7
Ta-Chi 輕度攀岩者註冊日期: 2003-05 文章: 77	攀岩與法律 The following question from the previous case is whether or not such a \"demand of leave\" once issued by responsible personnel would serve in Taiwan as a cutoff between the incumbents and the participants in terms of legality? In the US, it is. I think one of the reasons for this is that in the US, the concept of \"property rights\" is a well established doctrine. If I ask you to leave becuase you have violated the rules set forth by the \"contract,\" (a form of jointly owned property rights -- that is, by your signing the \"waiver\"), then it becomes your burden/responsibility if anything happens to you due to the fact that you have already disclaimed your property rights by breaching the contract. This is just my interpretation, and it can be wrong. But does Taiwan\'s legal system have the similar doctrine like this such that we can prusue in order to have both sides (incumbents and participants) to become more aware of each other\'s responsibility and legal limits?

2003-06-11, 01:23	#8
hank 攀言新手註冊日期: 2003-05 文章: 13	攀岩與法律忘了向大家報告: 該員為法警,報名現場體驗攀岩,因過4:00截止時間而沒報上,活動截止後,該員突然像中邪(當事人說的)般的往上攀爬,也不理會旁人勸阻. 當事人右腳跟粉碎性骨折,左大腿骨折,脊椎擠壓. 不過當時因sars高峰期,該員又曾到過台大,因骨折而發燒,被疑為sars,後來經檢驗為非sars才轉入普通病房.[addsig] __________________ 我是大胖.HANK就是我在岩場不爬岩一直聊天的就是我 http://tw.myblog.yahoo.com/climbing-everest