A Sydney tramway passenger was injured in a collision with another tram, which occurred after the driver collapsed at the controls. The plaintiff argued that the collision could have been avoided if the tramway authority had fitted the tram with a system known as 'dead man's handle', a system in use on Sydney's trains. This would have stopped the tram and avoided the accident. The device had been rejected by the tramway authorities because it was felt that it could cause drivers to become tired, irritated and inefficient. There was no evidence of any similar device in use on two-man trams anywhere in the world. Will the plaintiff succeed in his claim? Explain your reasoning.

1.Identify the PARTIES

2.Identify the ISSUE

3.Identify the legal RULES that may apply to the problem

4.Analyse the facts/issues with reference to the legal rules and APPLY the legal rules to them

5.CONCLUSION-what is your advice to the party or parties in the problem