Thread: Briton Matt Prior Brutally Attacked Outside Bangkok Nightclub

Originally Posted by Seekingasylum

Suing a boiler room establishment would require deep pockets and I rather think it inevitable a list of witnesses testifying to the victim's " drunken, rude and potentially violent behaviour " would be produced to the Court which would doubtless then determine the victim must share responsibility for his injuries and the cost of treatment.

A Pyrrhic victory for the farang beckons.

CCTV goes a long way in proving guilt or innocents, attack happened allegedly on the street.
Insurance company is who pays, not the boiler house or night club, they are not going to pay out for false witnesses etc to cover up for an insurance claim.

The medical costs are not that big by insurance standards, if the CCTV shows the attack and the bouncer is to blame, they will pay.

Originally Posted by jamescollister

Originally Posted by Seekingasylum

Suing a boiler room establishment would require deep pockets and I rather think it inevitable a list of witnesses testifying to the victim's " drunken, rude and potentially violent behaviour " would be produced to the Court which would doubtless then determine the victim must share responsibility for his injuries and the cost of treatment.

A Pyrrhic victory for the farang beckons.

CCTV goes a long way in proving guilt or innocents, attack happened allegedly on the street.
Insurance company is who pays, not the boiler house or night club, they are not going to pay out for false witnesses etc to cover up for an insurance claim.

The medical costs are not that big by insurance standards, if the CCTV shows the attack and the bouncer is to blame, they will pay.

James, the club already accepted liability and sacked the bouncer. That they may wish to wriggle out of the financial compensation that flows from that is entirely another matter. Plus, any insurance liability is mitigated, if not entirely invalidated, by the insured " or his agents, servants etc" acting unlawfully in giving rise to a claim.

Assaulting a member of the public in such a disproportionate and violent manner outside the premises is clearly a criminal act in anyone's book and therefore no insurance company would consider their contract to be binding unless said contract contained a clause indemnifying such an act.