PPL damages liability

[undertheweather]

I read in this morning's paper (The Times - Page 8) that Ray Cochrane, the jockey that was in the crash with Frankie Dettori, is suing the pilot's widow for £500,000 for injury, loss of earnings etc. I don't wish to comment on this case, but this seems to be an example of the litigation crazy world that we now seem to live in.

But what are the implications to us PPL's? If I take up a passenger (friend, colleague, girlfriend etc) to experience the joys of flight, and (God forbid) there is an accident resulting in injury, can they sue the pants off me (or my estate)?

Can I ask them to sign a waiver before the trip, and if I do, does it have any legal meaning?

Is there just a simple answer to this, in that adequate third-party insurance should cover most of the possibilities?

[RotorHorn]

Its probably covered by the aircraft insurance if you self-fly hire. Even home insurance has some third party insurance included in it.

Would imagine its the same as in a car. If your passenger is injured (wife, girlfriend, etc.) they can sue you for a personal injury claim which your motor insurance will have to pay out on your behalf....

[Rallye Driver]

I think you'll find that a passenger is covered by third party insurance for the aircraft. What you may need to check is whether you are covered for any damage to yourself.

On one of the aircraft I fly, the pilot is specifically excluded and needs separate personal insurance to cover any loss of earnings/injury etc resulting from an accident.

It's best to check before you hire to find out the terms and conditions, and also what excess applies. A group I used to belong to had an excess of £500.

A group I belong to now has a "Prang Club' policy, where for £30 a year the excess is waived unless you have a fuel related accident (ie running out while in the air).

RD

[FNG]

You cannot obtain a valid waiver of liability for personal injury or death caused by your own negligence. If you give a friend or relative a ride in your car, crash through careless driving, and your friend is killed or injured, you would expect a claim to be made against you, which your car insurance would cover. This might even be done without undue acrimony. The situation is no different in flying.

The jockey may or may not have a case, depending upon the cause of the accident, as to which I have no knowledge and offer no view. I emphatically agree that litigation-craziness is deplorable, but injury in a (ground, sea or air) vehicle crash gives rise to a situation which most people would regard as one where it is not inherently irresponsible to consider compensation. Rather different from spilling your hot coffee and other claims direct type nonsense.

It is better to be insured.

PS: I am a lawyer but do not do accident cases and do not work on contingency fees, which are in my view harmful to the public interest.

[undertheweather]

Thanks for the replies. What is the situation though, when there is no proof of negligence (or careless driving in the car case)? Must there always be allocation of blame, to which lawyers can attach themselves.

In other words is it possible to be sued by an injured passenger where the insurance company throws up its hands and says 'you're on your own, pal'?

[FNG]

There is no liability without proof of negligence (which means failure to maintain a reasonable standard of performance in the activity concerned, be it flying, driving, or whatever). Negligence is sometimes presumed. For example, in a case where pilot and passengers die after an aircraft stalls and spins in from the circuit, with no evidence in the wreckage of mechanical fault, airframe failure, overloading etc, it might be said that the accident must have been a consequence of careless loss of control through incorrect control inputs. Otherwise, the borderline between error of judgment and negligence is particularly difficult to establish in activities which involve large elements of judgment and of risk, such as aviation and mountain sports.

Most insurance claims are settled without involving lawyers. If a claim is made which has no merit, the insurer should fight it on your behalf, although it might make a nuisance value or commercial settlement depending on the apparent strength of the claim and the likely cost of resisting it. Insurance can protect you not only against claims for which you are liable, but also against hassle and expense where you are not to blame.