does he have a case or not ?

[Proper Bo]

Sorry, I seem to have had a gas buildup.

Methane gas?

Next up on mastermind; Virtualbody. Specialist subject: stating the feckin obvious

[JPaul]

Was he smoking in a non-smoking area? This is of little relevance, it is possible to have a naked flame without smoking. In fact I would suggest that he had not even got as far as actually lighting the cigarette. It may result in a small reduction in the amount of any award.

I can't agree.

The fact that he was breaking the rules, a rule possibly put there to avoid such incidents, must have a bearing on his claim.

The fact that you can have a naked flame without smoking is not relevant to the "smoking policy" issue.

Tho' I agree it is relevant, in and of itself.

[lynx]

If there was a no-flame (I suppose it should be "no naked lights" but I didn't want to get Manker over-excited) rule then that would cover this instance, and the purpose of his use of the naked flame is unnecessary.

If there wasn't a "no naked lights" rule the company can't then use a "no smoking" rule as some sort of catch-all. Otherwise it could be argued that it was ok to have a naked light for some other purpose, and that would clearly be nonsense. If indeed the company foresaw this sort of possibility then it should have had a "no naked lights" rule and was therefore negligent.

Either way the "no smoking" rule is a side-issue not related to the company's liability.

Has it actually been established that he was smoking? He may simply have been sucking on the unlit cigarette as a placebo and at the same time admiring his newly acquired lighter. Finding a burnt cigarette afterwards is no proof, the guy himself was badly burned and cigarettes are much more flammable than people.

[manker]

but I didn't want to get Manker over-excited

You're grammar simply isn't good enough to achieve that

[JPaul]

I take your point that the whole naked flame thing is an issue and that in these circumstances a ban would be appropriate.

However it is quite possible to light a cigarette and smoke it without the involvement of flame. Some places I know of have hot wires which are used to light cigarettes (similar to a car cigarette lighter) They allow smoking in certain limited areas and do not allow any matches or lighters onto the site. So chaps must go to these places to light and smoke the cigarette. The cigarette then smolders with no flame.

In my opinion the fact that he was in the process of breaking a rule when he caused the incident must surely be a factor in apportioning blame.

[lynx]

but I didn't want to get Manker over-excited

You're grammar simply isn't good enough to achieve that

Not surprising, she's been dead for over 30 years. Probably a little ripe even for you.

[JPaul]

You're grammar simply isn't good enough to achieve that

Not surprising, she's been dead for over 30 years. Probably a little ripe even for you.

:babumdish:

[manker]

Feck's sake. This time last month, mod rodding was easy

[JPaul]

Feck's sake. This time last month, mod rodding was easy

If you try to rod a mod he may mod your rod.

[manker]

Feck's sake. This time last month, mod rodding was easy

If you try to rod a mod he may mod your rod.

He'd have to get his hands on it first


Question; TOtally unrelated but I know how vid is extremely magnanimous when his threads go off-topic - I've just got a new phone, hawt it is, but I've no clue how to work it.

Should I spend this last 30 mins before I go out trying to figure it out so all the local chavs can see for themselves and be amazed, or would it be more prudent to carry on posting pish and prolly be a bit late.