4 ms·

I thought exactly the same. Avoiding automaton let them bring a whole court system to its knees which meant they could get away with breaking the law.

by sp332 6y ago

marcosdumay 6y ago
No that you said it, court systems should have overuse tariffs, so the people that overwhelm them subside the extra capacity they need.
- otterley 6y ago
  At least in the U.S., courts already charge filing and other fees, which in these small cases might be more than the potential damages. (Unless you can seek punitive or multiple damages depending on what the law allows.) That's why class actions are often used here, since it would be impractical to file a case on behalf of every injured claimant.
  - pbhjpbhj 6y ago
    USA, like UK, has a small claims system too. In theory that makes legal redress less costly (for the complainant and the court system). https://www.dca.ca.gov/publications/small_claims/basic_info.shtml https://www.dca.ca.gov/publications/small_claims/basic_info....
  - sokoloff 6y ago
    It is fairly common for the prevailing party to be awarded their filing fees.
- pbhjpbhj 6y ago
  A naive implementation wouldn't work though - some companies need to sue lots of people, but will win almost all the time. It seems wrong to penalise the defendant because they committed a tort against someone who regularly successfully sues others. Mind you, there's a "build footpaths where people walk" aspect here too. If someone is suing lots of people it might be that the law is 'wrong' (contrary to modal picnic views of morality, say) and that the demos don't find the action to be something the law should prohibit?
  - MichaelZuo 6y ago
    The implementation that mostly works well in Canada and Alaska is a partial loser-pays system. The areas of the judiciary where it’s not strictly applied are the areas that have the most problems, namely Family Courts.
  - marcosdumay 6y ago
    If the idea is any good (of course, I'm not certain), it can not be automatic, and can not be based on what part brings the issue to the court.

I thought exactly the same. Avoiding automaton let them bring a whole court system to its knees which meant they could get away with breaking the law.

by sp332 6y ago

I thought exactly the same. Avoiding automaton let them bring a whole court system to its knees which meant they could get away with breaking the law.

marcosdumay 6y ago

No that you said it, court systems should have overuse tariffs, so the people that overwhelm them subside the extra capacity they need.

otterley 6y ago
At least in the U.S., courts already charge filing and other fees, which in these small cases might be more than the potential damages. (Unless you can seek punitive or multiple damages depending on what the law allows.) That's why class actions are often used here, since it would be impractical to file a case on behalf of every injured claimant.
- pbhjpbhj 6y ago
  USA, like UK, has a small claims system too. In theory that makes legal redress less costly (for the complainant and the court system). https://www.dca.ca.gov/publications/small_claims/basic_info.shtml https://www.dca.ca.gov/publications/small_claims/basic_info....
- sokoloff 6y ago
  It is fairly common for the prevailing party to be awarded their filing fees.
pbhjpbhj 6y ago
A naive implementation wouldn't work though - some companies need to sue lots of people, but will win almost all the time. It seems wrong to penalise the defendant because they committed a tort against someone who regularly successfully sues others. Mind you, there's a "build footpaths where people walk" aspect here too. If someone is suing lots of people it might be that the law is 'wrong' (contrary to modal picnic views of morality, say) and that the demos don't find the action to be something the law should prohibit?
- MichaelZuo 6y ago
  The implementation that mostly works well in Canada and Alaska is a partial loser-pays system. The areas of the judiciary where it’s not strictly applied are the areas that have the most problems, namely Family Courts.
- marcosdumay 6y ago
  If the idea is any good (of course, I'm not certain), it can not be automatic, and can not be based on what part brings the issue to the court.