can you send answer in detail

re changed our lives. We now have almost unfettered access to ;, all at our fingertips. While smartphones broaden our presence in the world, they can also narrow our view of the world as we spend much more time looking down at our smartphone and less time at the world around us. This case study focuses on the unintended impact our smartphones can have on others. Joelle, Josh, and Scott were all eager students in the Business Law class at the University of Lethbridge. It was their favorite class by far and really, how could it not be?! Unbeknownst to them, their lives would soon intersect outside of the classroom. It was a dark and stormy Saturday night in May. At midnight, Josh was driving his Toyota Corolla westbound on 17th Ave SW approaching 14th St. His passenger was Nathan. The intersection of 17th Ave and 14th St is controlled by traffic lights. Josh was travelling at 45km/h (in a 50km/h zone) as he approached the intersection and was facing a green light. Josh received a text message from his girlfriend and he looked down at his smartphone. As he did so, the traffic light ahead changed to red. Josh was unaware of the situation ahead as he was looking at his smartphone. As Josh travelled through the red light, he struck a northbound Honda Civic broadside. The Honda had entered the intersection on a green light and was operated by Johann, with Joelle as his passenger. Both vehicles came to rest in the northwest corner of the intersection. At the time of the collision, Joelle had been fixated on her smartphone checking out popular tourist destinations in Vienna. As a result, Joelle did not see the collision occur. Josh was wearing his seatbelt and his driver's side airbag was deployed. He suffered minimal injuries and was seen by EMS at the scene but not transported to hospital. Nathan was not wearing his seatbelt, but the passenger side airbag was deployed. Unfortunately for Nathan, the passenger side airbag in the car was defective and only partially inflated. As a result, Nathan suffered significant facial trauma that he would not have suffered had he been wearing his seatbelt and had the airbag properly deployed. Josh had in fact received three recall notices from Toyota Canada over the past three months warning him of the defective passenger side airbag and advising him to bring the car in so that the airbag could be replaced. Josh did not bring his car in for the recall. Johann suffered serious injuries and was transported to hospital where he underwent surgery and faced a long recovery period. He was unable to work for six months, his car was totalled, and he had $20,000 in out-of-pocket medical expenses. Joelle was also injured though not as seriously as Johann. Joelle was hospitalized for one week and was released to recover at home. Unfortunately for her, at the time of the collision, Johann was driving Joelle to the airport where she was going to fly to Vienna for a few days for a job interview with a prestigious accounting firm. She had been shortlisted for the position and the job was essentially hers, the interview being a necessary formality. As Joelle was not able to travel to Vienna and therefore missed the interview, she did not get the position. The job would have paid CDN $225,000 per year. Joelle's airfare and hotel were non-refundable, and she therefore lost a further $5000 due to her inability to travel to Vienna. To add insult to injury, Joelle also missed a Business Law class. Shortly before the collision occurred, Scott had been walking westbound on the north sidewalk alongside 17 Ave. after a night of socializing. Scott was looking down at his smartphone as he was walking when the collision occurred. Scott was startled by the sound of the collision and tripped over JohnBoy who had stopped and bent down to tie his shoelace. Scott fell over JohnBoy and his smartphone went flying in the air and landed on the road where it was run over by a vehicle. JohnBoy suffered a broken nose when his face was pushed down onto the sidewalk. There was another unfortunate consequence of the collision for Johann. At the time of the collision, Johann was in the restaurant equipment supply business. He had a contract to fully supply a new restaurant ("Lolita's Fine Indian Cuisine") with all of its kitchen equipment. The contract was very specific as to what equipment was required and when it was to be installed. The contract stated that all the work was to be completed by May 30 and the contract provided that "time is of the essence." The contract also contained a penalty clause that provided that should Johann be late in completing the installation, he would face a penalty of $1000 per day. Lolita learned of Johann's injuries and hospitalization on May 25 when he failed to show for a meeting. As of May 25, Lolita knew that Johann would not be able to personally complete his contractual obligations due to his hospitalization. 1. Please advise what cause(s) of action Josh, Nathan, Johann, Joelle, Scott and JohnBoy have regarding the collision and its aftermath, against whom and why. 2. When providing the collision related advice, also advise each potential plaintiff of available defences that potential defendants might have and the predicted likelihood of success in litigation. 3. Advise both Johann and Lolita regarding each party's legal position regarding Johann's inability to complete the restaurant contract