Shock booze law proposal

The_Ogre

The_Ogre

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 30, 2010
Messages
27,927
Reaction score
11,072
Location
Cape Town
Durban - The government wants to make liquor traders, manufacturers and distributors legally liable for harm or damage caused by people who have drunk too much alcohol.

This is a proposal from Trade and Industry Minister Rob Davies in a new discussion document in the Government Gazette dealing with proposed amendments to the Liquor Act.

The proposal has been welcomed by activist groups such as South Africans Against Drunk Driving, but insurance underwriters warned that it could open the liquor and hospitality industry to a range of new legal claims similar to medical malpractice suits.

According to the discussion document dated May 20: “It is proposed that liability for manufacturers and suppliers be introduced to ensure they take responsibility not to supply their products to unlicensed traders.

“In respect to retailers, in line with the agreed norms and standards, traders should not serve liquor products to already intoxicated persons.

“Should that happen and the intoxicated person is involved in a motor accident or crime related to substance abuse, the manufacturer, distributor and trader should bear liability for any harm or damages.”

[.../]

Source

What the actual... :wtf:
 
Jackie-Chan-WTF.jpg
 
I approve.

I have done some pretty stupid things while being drunk. Now they can take the wrap for it :p
 
YingYang said:
Durban - The government wants to make liquor traders, manufacturers and distributors legally liable for harm or damage caused by people who have drunk too much alcohol.

This is a proposal from Trade and Industry Minister Rob Davies in a new discussion document in the Government Gazette dealing with proposed amendments to the Liquor Act.

The proposal has been welcomed by activist groups such as South Africans Against Drunk Driving, but insurance underwriters warned that it could open the liquor and hospitality industry to a range of new legal claims similar to medical malpractice suits.

According to the discussion document dated May 20: “It is proposed that liability for manufacturers and suppliers be introduced to ensure they take responsibility not to supply their products to unlicensed traders.

“In respect to retailers, in line with the agreed norms and standards, traders should not serve liquor products to already intoxicated persons.

“Should that happen and the intoxicated person is involved in a motor accident or crime related to substance abuse, the manufacturer, distributor and trader should bear liability for any harm or damages.”

[.../]

Source

What the actual... :wtf:
Click to expand...

Why not make the person who signed the liquor licence for the place that sold the booze to the person who cause the harm or damage.

Or, what about the person who employed the person who signed the liquor licence for the place that sold the booze to the person who cause the harm or damage.

Or, how about the head of the department which employs the person who employed the person who signed the liquor licence for the place that sold the booze to the person who cause the harm or damage.

Stuff it - just sue Chuckles the Clown.
 
Albereth said:
Why not make the person who signed the liquor licence for the place that sold the booze to the person who cause the harm or damage.

Or, what about the person who employed the person who signed the liquor licence for the place that sold the booze to the person who cause the harm or damage.

Or, how about the head of the department which employs the person who employed the person who signed the liquor licence for the place that sold the booze to the person who cause the harm or damage.

Stuff it - just sue Chuckles the Clown.
Click to expand...

Up one level, you can sue the government for allowing the liquor license of the place to be signed in. that would defeat their own means. lol
 
Do the proposed changes include making shebeens liable ?
 
Great, this means we can claim back all the money stolen by this government from their voters!
 
So, based on this logic, if I cause an accident with a Castle in my hand, then SABMiller are liable? Or is it the liquor store I bought i from? Or the wholesaler that sold it to the liquor store?

What messed up logic, but then again, logic does not apply when it comes to the SA Government and their decision-making process!

B
 
Durban - The government wants to make liquor traders, manufacturers and distributors legally liable for harm or damage caused by people who have drunk too much alcohol.
Click to expand...

There's your problem right there. I could handle half a bottle of Vodka without so much as a slur and have once before stripped and put a PC back together perfectly after almost an entire bottle of Whiskey. Yet I've seen guys pass out after 8 shots of Vodka.

How do you define too much?
 
this is proof that the government has some pretty fsuckn stupid people 'working' there. imagine how expensive booze will become. unless they want you to stop buying. then people will just go underground. make their own. that is even more dangerous. nice nanny state.
 
Beerisgood said:
There's your problem right there. I could handle half a bottle of Vodka without so much as a slur and have once before stripped and put a PC back together perfectly after almost an entire bottle of Whiskey. Yet I've seen guys pass out after 8 shots of Vodka.

How do you define too much?
Click to expand...
You took your clothes off and put a PC back together?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X