Wow, I just read that Ontario's highest court overturned a judge's ruling that awarded $300,000 in damages to a woman who got into an accident while driving home drunk after an office Christmas party in 1994. Maybe this means there's hope for common sense after all!
If you're not quite sure what I'm talking about, recall that a year or two ago it was all over the news that a woman was suing her company for allowing her to drive home after drinking at an office party. She won, despite the fact that she went somewhere else after leaving the party, and the fact that people at the party did try to dissuade her from driving (or, at least, that's what I think happened, if I remember correctly).
The reason I remember the incident is that the ruling struck me as extremely stupid--on par with the ruling that held McDonald's accountable for the burns a woman suffered from spilling hot coffee on herself while she was driving. I even wrote an essay that mentioned the case, entitled "Wasn't Me," because I thought, and still think, that the ruling(s) demonstrated a trend in society for not taking responsibility for one's own actions. Why should companies be held responsibile when people do things that they should know not to do anyway? How often do we hear that we shouldn't drive while under the influence, or while trying to eat, drink, or talk on cellphones? Doesn't common sense tell you not to do these things as well?
It was truly disheartening for me to realize that judges, people I would expect to think logically, would make rulings that basically implied that people can shift the blame for injuries that are caused by their own lack of common sense! So I'm very glad to hear that the judgement was set aside. I mean, it's a tragedy that a woman was severely injured in a drunk driving accident, but it was ludicrous to hold the company responsible her own actions and decisions. Gah. That essay made the point much more clearly...maybe I should post it...
