Are Japanese Courts as Silly as American Courts?

EdZiomek · 4 May 2007

I am curious about Japanese courts and their system of justice.

In America, anybody can be sued for any reason. What is most damaging is that periodically we get instances of court judgements and cases that are absolutely, positively RIDICULOUS in their content, but display the levels of dysfunction and ethical corruption we face.

One famous American case is the McDonalds coffee case, a woman was scalded by hot coffee, she sued and won 2.5 million dollars. Yes, she ordered hot coffee, spilled it on herself, and yes, it was hot, she claimed injury etc.

Another famous case is the Tobacco Settlement lawsuit wherein 23 American states sued the tobacco companies and won a settlement of $360 Billion dollars, which the lawyers received up to half, and most of it I am told was fiddled away so that cancer victims will never see a dime.

The third and final case is the ghastly recent case of a Korean dry cleaning place who lost a pair of pants of some lawyer/judge, who turned around and sued for $64 million dollars, which is still being debated in the courts.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/25/AR2007042502763.html

To me, it is another example of the insanity, the dysfunction, the ethical corruption, and the background racism that is saturated in America. In my sincerest, saddest opinionated thoughts, had the businessman been an Irishman, or an Italian, this would never, never be where it is today. It would have been laughed out of court.

Does Japan have these silly insane examples of judicial bureaucratic corruption?

Ewok85 · 4 May 2007

Of a different sort. Japan has a near 100% criminal conviction rate, jails are rather rigid to the point of being almost being inhumane, and money plays a major part in how cases are handled and decided upon.

Probably the biggest joke I've heard lately was the main suspect in the Lucy Blackman case going free despite all the evidence to the contrary.

yukio_michael · 4 May 2007

Frankly, the Japanese Judicial/Jail/Prison system scares the crap out of me, which keeps me on my best behavior while in Japan...

basuotoko · 5 May 2007

Ewok85 said:
Probably the biggest joke I've heard lately was the main suspect in the Lucy Blackman case going free despite all the evidence to the contrary.

That reminds me of the case of Issei Sagawa. He's a Japanese cannibal who murdered and consumed a French woman while studying abroad in the early 1980s. He was immediately caught and turned over to Japan where, with the help of his rich father, was freed within 15 months and is now a free man.

The American court system may have its problems, but the Japanese courts are certainly no beacon of light either.

maushan3 · 5 May 2007

May I add another silly court case: Recently a man sued Donald Trump because he was not chosen for his television show "The Apprentice". This guy claims he auditioned and was not chosen because he was discriminated by his age of 40-something.

Mauricio

xerxes99 · 5 May 2007

EdZiomek said:
One famous American case is the McDonalds coffee case, a woman was scalded by hot coffee, she sued and won 2.5 million dollars. Yes, she ordered hot coffee, spilled it on herself, and yes, it was hot, she claimed injury etc.

When you look up the facts of this case it doesn't actually seem quite as ridiculous as you might think. she suffered third degree burns over 6 percent of her body including her groin, buttocks and thighs. she was in the hospital for 8 days and needed repeated skin grafts. the big award was in punitive damages basically to punish mcdonalds for serving their coffee at a temperature they knew was unsafe aftr 700! previous similar injuries.
you can read more here;
Sitemap on UpCounsel

maushan3 · 5 May 2007

xerxes99 said:
When you look up the facts of this case it doesn't actually seem quite as ridiculous as you might think. she suffered third degree burns over 6 percent of her body including her groin, buttocks and thighs. she was in the hospital for 8 days and needed repeated skin grafts. the big award was in punitive damages basically to punish mcdonalds for serving their coffee at a temperature they knew was unsafe aftr 700! previous similar injuries.
you can read more here;
Sitemap on UpCounsel

IMO this is just some common sense. You know how hot coffee can be, right? It's one of the reason's why I dislike it. So, just use the darn common sense. I know this most probably was an accident, but the lady took the advantage to sue McD's when in fact I don't think the restaurant was responsible for any of it, they just sold her the coffee.

Mauricio

KirinMan · 5 May 2007

One famous American case is the McDonalds coffee case, a woman was scalded by hot coffee, she sued and won 2.5 million dollars. Yes, she ordered hot coffee, spilled it on herself, and yes, it was hot, she claimed injury etc.

There is quite a bit of urban legend running around the internet about this particular case.

The jury awarded Liebeck $200,000 in compensatory damages. This amount
was reduced to $160,000 because the jury found Liebeck 20 percent at
fault in the spill. The jury also awarded Liebeck $2.7 million in
punitive damages, which equals about two days of McDonalds' coffee
sales.

The award was also reduced to 480,000 but noone knows the actual outcome of this case as the parties involved entered into a secret aggreement that has never been revealed. Mc Donalds was at fault in this case. Read the link in maushans post.

Nall-ohki · 5 May 2007

maushan3 said:
IMO this is just some common sense. You know how hot coffee can be, right? It's one of the reason's why I dislike it. So, just use the darn common sense. I know this most probably was an accident, but the lady took the advantage to sue McD's when in fact I don't think the restaurant was responsible for any of it, they just sold her the coffee.
Mauricio

Ummm... okay, please let me illuminate some of the details:

1. As has been noted, she received 3rd degree burns - the kind of burns that DESTROY THE ENTIRE SKIN TISSUE and require skin grafts and months of therapy to get even close to what they were before. Even then, the skin there will be forever scarred.

This was caused by the fact that the coffee that dropped on her was nearly 88 degrees Celsius (190 degrees Fahrenheit), which is ABSURDLY hot, and had already been mentioned, had caused similar injuries in the past.

How about this: Imagine something dangerous like acid was used to eat a particular food at an expensive restaurant, and the server at the restaurant served it near you on the plate, which, then due to a bump of the tray spilled it on you, burning your crotch, causing incredible burns, scarring, pain, and requiring you to move skin from your back to make things grow there again.

You then find out that his has happened to dozens of people at that restaurant already, and they have done nothing to correct the matter... would you sue?

You may think this trite, but remember: near boiling coffee does nearly the same type of thing to skin as quite a few acids.

The woman asked for money to cover her medical expenses at first ($22,000), but McDonalds only offered her $800.

She ended up getting around $600,000, which is part of punitive damages, which the Jury decides to award as a punishment to McDonalds. The woman receives this money, but she cannot dictate it's amount. Basically, she thought she was entitled to $22,000, was awarded $160,000 when she had to take it to court, and the jury decided to fine McDonalds an additional $440,000. Keep in mind this woman got FAR less than this amount (lawyer fees are usually a percentage of winnings - 60% is not unheard of).

EdZiomek · 5 May 2007

Many good responses, thank you.

First of all, if the woman received 3rd degree burns...that is horrifying and she should receive compensation.

But what I find so impossible in this story is that only one person suffered in this boiling coffee problem?

How is this possible? In America, if there is a bus accident with 15 passengers, you can be sure there will be 22 lawsuits filed for claimants saying they were on that bus. Oh, and they will have Police eyewitnesses lined up, and doctors, and lawyers, and chiropracters, and ex wives claiming lack of sexual function in their spouse, etc. etc.

The clown in the claim against the Korean dry cleaner guy in Virginia, is a lawyer AND an administrative judge! How convenient! $64 million dollars, throw him out of his job for "Gross Lack of Judgement, Making False Claims".

We ALL have been scalded on the tongue...by hot coffee. Fine. I stopped drinking! Only one human being in the history of the United States that I know of has ever sued for too hot coffee, EVER. Not even her fellow customers of McDonalds sued McDonalds, on the day of the problem! Hell, how many people would be tempted to claim, for one million dollars, yeah, I was right next to her... class action stupid lawsuit, give me my retirement check!

NOBODY ELSE CLAIMED A SCALDED TONGUE? But she received third degree burns?

Not before, not ever since???? What is wrong with this picture?

Ewok85 · 5 May 2007

Nall-ohki said:
This was caused by the fact that the coffee that dropped on her was nearly 88 degrees Celsius (190 degrees Fahrenheit), which is ABSURDLY hot, and had already been mentioned, had caused similar injuries in the past.

People are injured and die of absurd things DAILY, burns from coffee outside of McD happen all the time. The reason why the coffee was so hot is because its the optimal temperature - despite what you can say about McD, they are fastidious about quality control, and this is no different. I serious doubt they have dropped the temperature of the coffee, they've just added warnings so that people can't make ridiculous claims.

I might go stab myself, oh my, I didn't realise this knife was sharp!

KirinMan · 5 May 2007

People are injured and die of absurd things DAILY, burns from coffee outside of McD happen all the time. The reason why the coffee was so hot is because its the optimal temperature - despite what you can say about McD, they are fastidious about quality control, and this is no different. I serious doubt they have dropped the temperature of the coffee, they've just added warnings so that people can't make ridiculous claims.

I might go stab myself, oh my, I didn't realise this knife was sharp

If you read the link about the case itself you may realize that in this case Mc'ds was out of line.

I agree that there should be some personal responsibility, like realizing that hot coffee is hot, however I do also think that companys have or are responsible for putting out safe products.

It is fairly reasonable to expect that a corporation like Mac's would look out for it's customers, and once again if you read the link you would realize that this particular franchise was going against standard Mac regulations with regards to the temperature of it's coffee.

Ewok85 · 5 May 2007

You said it - hot coffee is hot. How much of a nanny state do we have to become before people wake up and realise that they are responsible for their own safety and use some common sense?

I personally, have a neko-jita - I'm pretty weak when it comes to hot things. I've burnt my mouth many times, and received blisters too, but never have I considered it a fault of the shop that served me hot products.

leonmarino · 6 May 2007

With regard to the McD coffee case.. What's wrong with serving hot coffee?!

It would be different if the area near the counter is full of hazards, and you can't leave the restaurant without spilling your coffee. But no, there is plenty of opportunity to leave without spilling, or even let your coffee cool down. It seems like your own responsibility if you spill something on yourself..

What if I stick my fork in my eye because of some sort of spasm in a restaurant, am I then allowed to sue the restaurant for having forks that are too sharp? If not, am I allowed to do so if there were 10 similar cases in the past? I don't think so; one of the characteristics of a fork is that its points are sharp enough to pierce meat. Similarly, one of the characteristics of hot coffee is that it's hot.. 80 degrees, 100 degrees, that's up to the restaurant. Whatever you do with the coffee is the customer's responsibility, isn't it?

gaijinalways · 6 May 2007

Many absurd cases are now thrown out, but yes the case of the 64 million dollar pants sounds absurd. I didn't get the customer's point, how much do you evaluate emotional suffering?

In Japan, slight correction, Obara is not free (being held on 9 other cases), but it is true he was acquitted in the Blackman case. Seems with the preponderance of evidence, he is definately guilty.

basuotoko · 6 May 2007

The 1992 McDonald's coffee lawsuit is notorious for being pulled into every single conversation regarding American courts and lawsuits. I can't even conceive how many times I've heard it. It's become part of our collective psyche (at least for Americans) and people love it so much probably because it paints a perfect picture for anyone who want to bash American culture and its legal system. -- fat, lazy and irresponsible Americans cruising through the McDonald's drive-thru and suing over anything.

Seriously read about it and educate yourselves. I agree that there have been plenty of ridiculous lawsuits throughout the ages (a prime example is the $64 million pair of pants) but this just isn't one of them.

KirinMan · 6 May 2007

Ewok85 said:
You said it - hot coffee is hot. How much of a nanny state do we have to become before people wake up and realise that they are responsible for their own safety and use some common sense?

I personally, have a neko-jita - I'm pretty weak when it comes to hot things. I've burnt my mouth many times, and received blisters too, but never have I considered it a fault of the shop that served me hot products.

Me too, on the neko-jita, and I thought the same way as well, however I changed my thoughts about this case after reading some of the facts. While I still agree that an individual has to take responsibility for their actions this goes beyond resonable in my opinion. Read a part of the information from the link;

The sweatpants Liebeck was wearing absorbed the coffee and held it next
to her skin. A vascular surgeon determined that Liebeck suffered full
thickness burns (or third-degree burns) over 6 percent of her body,
including her inner thighs, perineum, buttocks, and genital and groin
areas. She was hospitalized for eight days, during which time she
underwent skin grafting. Liebeck, who also underwent debridement
treatments, sought to settle her claim for $20,000, but McDonalds
refused.

During discovery, McDonalds produced documents showing more than 700
claims by people burned by its coffee between 1982 and 1992. Some claims
involved third-degree burns substantially similar to Liebecks. This
history documented McDonalds' knowledge about the extent and nature of
this hazard.

McDonald's Hot Coffee Case

Like I said I originally thought whoa another stupid case of someone suing someone else. however after learning the facts, I agree that Mac's was liable.

EdZiomek · 6 May 2007

I am wrong again, thank you.

Obeika and Basuotoko and others, I was not aware of these details on the McDonalds case and the proliferation of other similar cases. I am wrong.
Thank you for the education.

PS, I wrote the Governor of Virginia, Tim Kaine, and received back the polite acknowledgement that his email-box had received my email....
"Thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts with me. I
appreciate your interest in issues that impact the Commonwealth of
Virginia.
Sincerely,
Tim Kaine
Governor of Virginia"

His email address is
Governor@ governor.virginia.gov
...if anyone wants to send him a message directly.

So scratch McDonalds as an example, with agreements on the Korean dry cleaner story. But let me assure anyone who is reading this, I have read countless stories like these, and I personally am living the effects of a horrific, dysfunctional, criminal judicial system, as have my sons on various occasions. It is devastating.

America gets up on our bully pulpit preaching "Freedom and Democracy" to the world, but in the end, usually comes down to two words, money and influence. How much money does one have to protect oneself? How much influence does one have? And usually, money buys influence, but not always. America's "class system" is based on the simple equation of "money" or "no money", that is my opinion.

And maybe it is a human nature thing, true throughout the world?

Sukotto · 6 May 2007

ok, the Macdonalls thing was cleared up for the original poster.

Wasn't it the case that Macdonalls was turning the temp way up beyond what was normal/needed on their coffee makers so they could reuse coffee grounds more than once?

i have no sympathy for corporations.
when people talk about "the nanny state",
i generally agree with them when it comes to real life actual people - humans.
but corporations are not human persons, but are a series of laws constructed to give special privileges of limited legal liability that would not ordinarily be there for you and me.

in Wisconsin in 1999 or so, the governor sold their settlement money (people were p.o.'d) for 4-5 times less and used it for budget deficits instead of treating cancer or treatments of nicotine addiction (this addictive narcotic is actually harder to quit than the illegal ones).

i wish that judge would have succeeded in revoking the corporate charters of the tobacco corporations

basically,
when some of the politicians during election year were talking about something called "tort reform", what it really was is gutting the judicial system. they want to gain even more legal protections than we grant with the legal shield of incorporation. they want us citizens to not be able to use the legal systim against corporations, which incidentally do billions more in crime every year than all of street crime combined.

KirinMan · 6 May 2007

First off EdZiomek, always the gentleman , thanks for your reply. I agree with you about the system as a whole. How about the prison inmates sueing because their ice cream wasn't cold enough.

The judge in the pants case, that sounds like the makings of another senseless daytime TV drama. .

When I was a kid if something happened I was taught to be responsible for my own actions, if I hurt some one or broke something I had to make ammends or pay for repairs. Do they even teach that anymore? People being responsible for themselves and not blaming everyone else for their failures.

Here in Japan court cases can take years and years to finalize so it isn't always reasonable to fight something in court, plus there seems to be a limit on actual and punitive damages, not sure about that, however I've never heard of a person getting 20 or 30 million bucks for sueing a company or person over some perceived "wrong-doing".

maushan3 · 6 May 2007

Ewok85 said:
You said it - hot coffee is hot. How much of a nanny state do we have to become before people wake up and realise that they are responsible for their own safety and use some common sense?

I personally, have a neko-jita - I'm pretty weak when it comes to hot things. I've burnt my mouth many times, and received blisters too, but never have I considered it a fault of the shop that served me hot products.

Haha, I don't know what a neko-jita is, but me too, I have a fear for hot things. I fear fire, matches, coffee, everything like that. And again, like you said, one is responsible for their own happenings like getting burnt by coffee.

Mauricio

KirinMan · 6 May 2007

maushan3 said:
Haha, I don't know what a neko-jita is, but me too, I have a fear for hot things. I fear fire, matches, coffee, everything like that. And again, like you said, one is responsible for their own happenings like getting burnt by coffee.
Mauricio

Neko jita literally means "cats tongue" translated practically means that one has a low tolerance for hot liquids in the mouth or on the tongue.

Sukotto · 6 May 2007

crap, i forgot to put in my post that,

tobacco corporations' executives knew for years and years and years
that their product was addictive, yet they lied to the consumer.
i saw a video in the mid 90s of execs testifying before congress and even tHEN they were denying the addiction, even though everyone with common sense pretty much knew that already.

it's just a way for the corporations to externalize responsibility.
they can say "oh, come on. no one made you start smoking."
yeah, but who claimed for decades it was harmless when they KNEW it was not?

Are Japanese Courts as Silly as American Courts?

後輩

先輩

後輩

先輩

Back home

Robot/Ninja

Back home

後輩

先輩

後輩

先輩

後輩

先輩

Back

puzzled gaijin

先輩

後輩

後輩

先輩

後輩

Back home

後輩

先輩

Similar threads