еще до того как стало понятно что асбест канцерогенен
Нет. Установленный (и упомянутый в решении) первый критерий ответственности — "знал или имел основания знать об опасности".
Как ни крути - NAVY виноваты
Несомненно. Но — иммунитет:
Feres v. United States, 340 U.S. 135 (1950), combined three pending federal cases for a hearing in certiorari in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the United States is not liable under the Federal Tort Claims Act for injuries to members of the armed forces sustained while on active duty and not on furlough and resulting from the negligence of others in the armed forces.[1] The opinion is an extension of the English common-law concept of sovereign immunity.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2019-03-20 01:24 pm (UTC)Нет. Установленный (и упомянутый в решении) первый критерий ответственности — "знал или имел основания знать об опасности".
Как ни крути - NAVY виноваты
Несомненно. Но — иммунитет:
Feres v. United States, 340 U.S. 135 (1950), combined three pending federal cases for a hearing in certiorari in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the United States is not liable under the Federal Tort Claims Act for injuries to members of the armed forces sustained while on active duty and not on furlough and resulting from the negligence of others in the armed forces.[1] The opinion is an extension of the English common-law concept of sovereign immunity.