This tiny submarine 2.4 miles under the sea, visiting the relics of RMS Titanic. Can it be found and the crew saved before the air runs out?

[Dogtrousers]

The Spanner Case is an interesting read along those lines.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_v_Brown

If it's the case I'm thinking of, the events happened in a shop in Shrewsbury, near to the Prince of Wales pub, just down the road from somewhere a friend of mine used to live.

We had the idea for a sitcom based on it called Frankwell Folk.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

The Spanner Case is an interesting read along those lines.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_v_Brown

Is that the one where some guy had his balls nailed to a floor (with his consent) by other guys but they were all convicted of assault anyway?

 

[FishFright]

Whose insurance? Claiming for what? And why isn't the claimant (whoever they are) paying for the recovery of the wreckage?

Have a guess , it's not too hard to figure out.

 

[Bonefish Blues]

The Spanner Case is an interesting read along those lines.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_v_Brown

For prurient interest, but not in the context of this (potential, if they can find someone worth sueing) claim.

 

[matticus]

So that’s why it sank, the open deck areas!

Well, actually ...

You may have got me there - plus doggy pointing out its a submersible; I was thinking of submarines which I've been reliably informed (by one of their residents) ARE boats.
So I've finally learned something from this thread!

( Do the bits the sailors stand on count as the "open deck" of a submarine? )

I should point out I've rarely sailed on anything that wasn't a ferry ...

 

[Mad Doug Biker]

Is that the one where some guy had his balls nailed to a floor (with his consent) by other guys but they were all convicted of assault anyway?

So it would appear.

 

[Dogtrousers]

Is that the one where some guy had his balls nailed to a floor (with his consent) by other guys but they were all convicted of assault anyway?

Yes. In the sitcom Frankwell Folk the running gag was to be that characters would repeatedly be unable to do things because they had been nailed in place. I can't think why we never made a success of it.

 

[Fab Foodie]

Seems as though it will be a Canadian led investigation.
"The Royal Canadian Mounted Police launch CRIMINAL probe into Titan submersible"
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...RIMINAL-probe-Titan-submersible-disaster.html

Do they ride seahorses?

 

[Mad Doug Biker]

I can't think why we never made a success of it.

Yes, that really is a mystery, isn't it?

 

[Ming the Merciless]

Do they ride seahorses?

Do keep up, covered several days ago!

 

[slowmotion]

Here's a purely technical question for @Reynard that's been puzzling me.......

.....as I understand it, "pre-preg" carbon fibre mat comes with epoxy resin etc already coating the fibres. How is the hardener/catalyst introduced so that the curing process can start? Is it already coated to the mat and only activated by elevated temperatures, or is some other process involved.

Thank you.

 

[Bollo]

Yes. In the sitcom Frankwell Folk the running gag was to be that characters would repeatedly be unable to do things because they had been nailed in place. I can't think why we never made a success of it.

This must be made!

 

[Beebo]

Is that the one where some guy had his balls nailed to a floor (with his consent) by other guys but they were all convicted of assault anyway?

Do we know if they used an experimental carbon fibre or titanium hammer?

 

[glasgowcyclist]

Do we know if they used an experimental carbon fibre or titanium hammer?

I think it was a standard ball-pain hammer.

 

[Profpointy]

Is that the one where some guy had his balls nailed to a floor (with his consent) by other guys but they were all convicted of assault anyway?

There is a significant difference in that it was a criminal prosecution for assault, even though the "victims" were seemingly willing and had made no complaint. A criminal offence is effectively seen as a crime against the state, rather than against the victim and hence is prosecuted as Regina vs whoever.

Nevertheless as someone has already alluded to, in the UK, you simply can't sign away your rights to damages under tort law, so waivers are less applicable than they possible are in the US. A waiver may still have some relevence that you've acknowledged that you are engaging in a risky activity but there is likely still a "duty of care" for some aspects even if there's not a blanked guarantee of safety

Tort case law can seem contradictory. Here are some I remember from Clerk and Lindsell. The gist is right but I may be sketchy on details

A householder sued a cricket club for broken windows but they lost, as it was held that cricket was vaguely a good thing and so broken windows were basically just bad luck

Another case <whoever> vs Cheltenham Cycle Club (a motorcycle club here) . They'd organised a motorbike race and the injured (maybe killed?) party was a spectator hit by a racer going off the course. It was held under "violenti" that racers coming off was a risk the spectator had willingly accepted.

Conversely in another case a landowner had tolerated ("suffered" was the word used) a bunch of kids playing football on a bit of waste land and a stray ball knocked off a moped rider who was killed. It was ruled the landowner was liable (under occupier's liability law) as he'd not prevented them playing there. To me this seemed wrong in law given what the rest of the book said , and one of the criteria used is "policy" whereby they might have ruled that kids playing casual football was generally a good thing. But anyhow, that was how the case went, however unfair it may seem for the landowner