hypothetical action

Gatling

Not looking for legal advice but a hypothetical situation with regarding the current threat of strike action at ESB ,
Could somebody take a case against say a union or other if they directly suffered pain and distress caused by power cuts , again only hypothetically speaking
Or is there a certain amount of protection given to strikers and there unions ,
Apologies in advance if this isn't suitable for this forum

234

I don't think that unions are really the issue here.

Theoretically you could sue the provider ie Electric Ireland, Bord Gais, Airtricity for breach of contract. You only have a contract with the provider. However, if I remember correctly most of their terms and conditions have exclusions for anything not amounting to actual negligence.

Even if you could proceed contract law doesn't allow damages from pain and suffering style stuff, unless the purpose of the contract is specifically for pleasure eg package holiday.

What kind of distress are you thinking ok?

hullaballoo

This is a classic question around utility providers. This question is basically the reason for the doctrine of pure economic loss.

Contract is out of the scenario because unless your provider is a total amateur, loss of provision will be covered, particularly in relation to industrial action.

Negligence is a different scenario but the defendant can't be those who validly withdrew their labour by way of industrial ballot. It can't be the provider because remoteness comes into play as well as a lack of any act or omission.

I'm struggling to see a way of framing this hypothetical action whereby general principles of law don't defeat the action outright. Admittedly, I'm not the most innovative of prosecutors.

Also, there are other things to take into consideration. ESB don't control all of the energy production in the state. There are plenty of private enterprises who have bought out power stations or entered the market otherwise. I suppose you would have to think about bringing those parties in as co-defendants. Now you're in financial trouble. These guys aren't rich.

I'd imagine that you're now struggling with both your defendant and your cause of action. I might well be wrong but this has become a very dangerous action, unless there is a huge amount of money at stake.
I don't think it's worth it tbh.

234

hullaballoo wrote: »

I don't think it's worth it tbh.

Litigation is such an expensive hobby

hullaballoo

234 wrote: »

Litigation is such an expensive hobby

I drag my shoulders and shudder just at the mention of it.

That said, please sue other people at your discretion because this will line my pockets with pure silk.

Gatling

hullaballoo wrote: »

This is a classic question around utility providers. This question is basically the reason for the doctrine of pure economic loss.

Contract is out of the scenario because unless your provider is a total amateur, loss of provision will be covered, particularly in relation to industrial action.

Negligence is a different scenario but the defendant can't be those who validly withdrew their labour by way of industrial ballot. It can't be the provider because remoteness comes into play as well as a lack of any act or omission.

I'm struggling to see a way of framing this hypothetical action whereby general principles of law don't defeat the action outright. Admittedly, I'm not the most innovative of prosecutors.

Also, there are other things to take into consideration. ESB don't control all of the energy production in the state. There are plenty of private enterprises who have bought out power stations or entered the market otherwise. I suppose you would have to think about bringing those parties in as co-defendants. Now you're in financial trouble. These guys aren't rich.

I'd imagine that you're now struggling with both your defendant and your cause of action. I might well be wrong but this has become a very dangerous action, unless there is a huge amount of money at stake.
I don't think it's worth it tbh.

This was a conversation today with a group of people none legal eagles ,but all suffer various health conditions a couple of us have various degenerative conditions and need to keep houses/ apartment's at a certain temperatures or suffer various symptoms that may require hospital treatments/ admissions ,
Now add the possibility of extended power cuts ,
Its not about litigation as I said its hypothetical ,