Daniel owns a pool cleaning business 'Clearer Solutions' which commenced three years ago. He operates from a physical shop in the Gold Coast. Prior to this, he used to work for 'Clear Solutions' also in the pool cleaning industry that is based in Sydney. The business of Clearer Solutions has been growing steadily. Daniel has had to work longer and longer hours in order to service his ever-increasing loyal customer base. Most of his customers pay him to regularly check and maintain their home pools so that these are in tip top condition and ready for immediate use.

One day, Emily a client of Clearer Solutions who retains Daniel's services decides to take a swim in her pool at home. Daniel has not had the time to check on her pool for several months now. Due to his extremely busy schedule and backlog of work, he has had to postpone Emily's pool check and maintenance. Unknown to Emily at the time, the pool has become a breeding ground for parasites due to poor pool upkeep. Emily contracts a severe skin inflammation as a result of her use of the pool. She is admitted to hospital and after extensive testing, the source is traced to parasites in her pool due to a lack of chlorine.

The medical tests indicate that these parasites are not known to cause such a severe skin reaction. Emily however suffers from an extremely rare skin condition that has an adverse allergic reaction to these parasites. She was not aware of her medical condition until this unfortunate incident. Emily has now fully recovered after several weeks in hospital. She has incurred $55,000 in hospital and medical expenses as a consequence.

REQUIRED: Advise Emily whether she has any possible remedies under the law of negligence. Refer to specific legal cases and/or statutory provisions to provide support for your answer.

The owners of Clear Solutions (Daniel's former Sydney employer), having heard about the incident reported in the news have recently issued a letter to Daniel informing him that the use of the words 'Clearer Solutions' in his business is infringing their trademark rights. They own the trademark for 'Clear Solutions' and have not consented for the use of the similar name by Daniel. As such, he must immediately cease to use those words in all his business activities.

REQUIRED: Advise Daniel. Refer to the relevant trademark laws in your discussion.