Business Law 231 Group Tort Assignment The plaintiff in this case‚ hereafter referred to as Erin Langworthy‚ has a cause of action against the following defendants: Victoria Falls Bungee Company and the Bungee Cord Manufacturer (if proven that the manufacturing of the bungee cord was faulty prior to any use). Each will be discussed throughout the report in their respective order‚ with emphasis on Victoria Falls Bungee Co. The cause of action being pursued against Victoria Falls Bungee Co. is
Premium Tort Tort law Negligence
1. Which torts protect against the intentional interference with persons? The torts that protect against the intentional interference are the following: Assault which is an intentional‚ unexcused act that creates in another person a reasonable apprehension or fear of im-mediate harmful or offensive contact. Battery‚ that is an unexcused‚ harmful‚ or offensive physical contact intention¬ally performed. False imprisonment is the intentional confinement or restraint of another person without justifi¬cation
Premium Tort Tort law Law
Safan Nizar Ali Dauva Professor Kurt S. Odenwald Business Law and Ethics February 17‚ 2011 Week 6 Assignment Chapter 23 Question no.5 Answer: No. CP Clare did not seek to improve the deal to take advantage of IRI’s sunk costs; rather it sought to enforce the bargain. And it did not take unexpected action against which IRI could not have defended. That a manufacturer will want to reassess its sales structure as volume grows must be understood by everyone--especially by a professional sales
Premium Tort Tort law
c(a) What laws would be available to Sally to seek compensation for her injured fingers? In giving your advice‚ would it make any difference if the juice extractor had been a gift to Sally from Steve Ans: * Sale of Goods Act (Allowed seller to exclude the implied terms so that the protection it gave could be taken away by a clearly worded exclusion clause) * Tort of negligence * Australian Consumer Law (ACL) (a) Are not of acceptable quality: s 54 (Supplier) and s271 (Manufacturer)
Premium Law Tort Consumer protection
Alf will have to prove that the company caused the injury negligently or without taking reasonable care to avoid injuring others. Alf will also have to prove a duty of care was owed‚ breach of duty and damaged caused by the breach‚ then only will the law allow compensation. The company will be against giving compensation as they can protect themselves by saying that Alf removed the guard “contrary to instructions”. In this case Alf will clearly be affected by contributory negligence as he had removed
Premium Tort Tort law Negligence
employer can be held liable for the torts of his/her employees. And after that I will focus on some of the reasons why one person is held liable in certain situations for the torts committed by another person. And then I will finally finish the essay with a conclusion at the end. Vicarious liability is where one person is held liable for the torts of another‚ even though that person did not commit the act itself. For an employer to be held liable for the tort of her/his employees‚ three conditions
Premium Employment Tort law Strict liability
likely be discharging this director any potential liability. Apart from this‚ directors are also not bound to give continuous attention to the company and he is justified in trusting official performing duties with honesty under City Equitable. Law Wai Duen v Boldwin Construction Co. Ltd Afterwards‚ Judge Hoffmann LJ in a later case Re D’Jan Ltd proposed that the directors’ duty of care and skill should be considered by a two-fold subjective/objective test. Still‚ City Equitable is the leading
Premium Law Standard of care Reasonable person
Assignment 1: Law and Healthcare HSA515 Health Care Policy‚ Law and Ethics Dr. Harold Griffin January 22‚ 2012 Identify and explain the four elements of proof necessary for a plaintiff to prove a negligence case The first element that a plaintiff must prove is that the defendant owed him or her legal duty of care. Generally‚ this duty of care is a legal notion that states that people owe anyone around them or anyone who could be around them a duty to not place them in situations
Premium Tort Tort law Law
likelihoods of product default. The seller sometimes may claim these warranties impliedly or expressly. They also may disclaim warranties or restrict buyers to a few requirements to qualify for a warranty. A warranty is a promise‚ arising by operation of law‚ that something that is sold will be merchantable and fit for the purpose for which it is sold. Express warranties: need to be communicated by words to the consumer by the seller. The seller can communicate the agreement in a written contract or
Premium Tort Negligence Implied warranty
sues an employing physician for ordering her to lift a heavy bookcase that injures her back‚ is the issue of liability standard of care or duty of care? Duty of Care 5. What is the basis for most medical malpractice claims? High damage awards in tort cases have led to a malpractice insurance crisis for physicians. 6. A patient falls on a hospitals slippery tile floor and injures herself. Assuming that patient safety procedures were lax‚ what two undesirable occurrences could result for the
Premium Medical malpractice Duty of care Tort law