This thesis examines legislation that creates a “safe habour” for apologies by making them inadmissible as evidence of liability in a civil action. In recent years, jurisdictions across North America and Australia have enacted such “apology legislation” in an effort to encourage apologies. This is allegedly done to assist victims, who often benefit from full and sincere apologies. Legislators are also motivated, however, by the perception that apologies can induce victims to settle or forgo legal action, thereby reducing litigation rates. Whether such a correlation exists, particularly for apologies given under apology legislation, has not been firmly established, and attempting to use apologies in this manner may prove harmful to victims and the state. Apologies are powerful, and if legislators are not careful, they may enact legislation that alters apologies so that they become a source of harm to victims, the legal system, and even society as a whole.

This thesis examines legislation that creates a “safe habour” for apologies by making them inadmissible as evidence of liability in a civil action. In recent years, jurisdictions across North America and Australia have enacted such “apology legislation” in an effort to encourage apologies. This is allegedly done to assist victims, who often benefit from full and sincere apologies. Legislators are also motivated, however, by the perception that apologies can induce victims to settle or forgo legal action, thereby reducing litigation rates. Whether such a correlation exists, particularly for apologies given under apology legislation, has not been firmly established, and attempting to use apologies in this manner may prove harmful to victims and the state. Apologies are powerful, and if legislators are not careful, they may enact legislation that alters apologies so that they become a source of harm to victims, the legal system, and even society as a whole.