sorry, i don't follow you hererob
- Original Message From:
"Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia."
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To:
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring]
Liability and SignageDate: 31/08/04 19:00>From: "L Hoffman"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED
section 9 would seem to apply to a situation where say, your employer
requires you to takepart in adventure training as a team building exercise
and requires you to sign a waiver which describes the activity as "risky"
especially if a promotion would be denied if you did not attend.
clubs and instr
Check out www.bindook.com
The site is back up after having been hijacked (it was being redirected to
a Melbourne bordello which come to think of it is probably appropriate for
the current state of airspace management in Australia). Now who might have
the incentive to do that do you think?
The fou
O2 couldn't be that good. What is he on ? And where did he get it ?
Roger Druce wrote:
Dear Robert
I think you obviously need to go on oxygen at sea level, never mind 10,000
feet!
Cheers
Roger Druce
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Robert
Dear Robert
I think you obviously need to go on oxygen at sea level, never mind 10,000
feet!
Cheers
Roger Druce
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Robert Hart
Sent: Tuesday, 31 August 2004 9:41 PM
To: Soaring in Australia.
Subject: [Aus-soarin
This morning I acted as a chauffeur and drove the Emirates
Airline Senior Vice President - Safety from Bne Airport to Southport for
the Annual Seminar of The International Society of Air Safety
Investigators. The said gentleman just happens to be the father of
two of my grandchildren!
I
Hi
My son Rory (study computational physics in Melbourne) sent me a URL to
a very interesting piece of recent research.
Without boring you all with the entire article, here is the relevant
extract...
"Entanglement allows particles to have a much closer relationship than
is possible in classical
From: "L Hoffman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
One of the links in the posting below has some direct relevance to
earlier discussions on this chat site re the value of signage. Refer
CIVIL LIABILITY ACT 2002 - SECT 5M
(1) A person ( "the defendant" ) does not owe a duty of care to another
person who enga
At 05:20 PM 31/08/04 +1000, you wrote:
>One of the links in the posting below has some direct relevance to
>earlier discussions on this chat site re the value of signage. Refer
>(4).
>Laurie Hoffman
Yeah and check out section 9. Might be interesting for instructors and
club commitees.
Mike
Borg
One of the links in the posting below has some direct relevance to
earlier discussions on this chat site re the value of signage. Refer
(4).
Laurie Hoffman
CIVIL LIABILITY ACT 2002 - SECT 5M
No duty of care for recreational activity where risk warning
5M No duty of care for recreational activit
10 matches
Mail list logo