Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
John wrote:

Strict liability would also be a huge plus.
What is that?

There's a good description on Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strict_liability

Ah, as I thought, the concept from the British common law on tort.

It's the system they have in the Netherlands whereby there is liability
regardless of negligence.

They don't have "common law" there. I guess you are probably confusing
it with their (and much of the rest of Europe's) insurance convention of
providing cover for "no-fault liability", a system where motorists'
insurance companies are expected to part-compensate vulnerable road
users that might suffer loss in a collision involving their insured's
car, up to 100% if the vulnerable road user is a minor. There, like
here, criminal fault has to be proven, based on evidence.

--
John