Hospitality Risk Management and Guest Security HSP260

CASE STUDY

Judges' decisions are customarily written and therefore recorded in books used for legal research. These written decisions are called cases,and the books in which they are published are called case books.These cases are part of the common law. You will read many cases in your study of Hospitality Law. Although at first they may seem difficult to understand you will soon develop the skill necessary to read them with a high level of comprehension. To understand a case, you should attempt to identify four elements as you read it:

1. The facts
2. The issue
3. The judge's decision
4. The reasoning supporting the decision.
5. Conclusion

The facts are those circumstances that gave rise to the lawsuit. The issue is the legal question that the parties have asked the judge to resolve. The decision is the judge's response to the issue. The reasoning is the basis and rationale for the decision.After reading the case, consider its implications vis--vis stare decisis, the decision, although involving unknown parties, inform hospitality managers how the law will be applied to their own situations. This enables innkeepers and restaurateurs to predict how the law will be interpreted and to prevent legal disputes before they arise. By understanding the implications of cases, the manager or owner can modify company policies and actions to conform to the law. Conclusion states whether you agree or disagree with the judge's decision and why by writing supporting details.

CASE STUDY

Evans v. Robinson

On Saturday September 10th, Mrs. Evans sat in a caf with a friend. The friend ordered and paid for some ginger beer, which came in a bottle made from dark opaque glass. Evans drank some of the contents then her friend proceeded to pour the remainder of the contents of the bottle into the tumbler when a snail, which was beginning to rot, floated out of the bottle. Mrs. Evans claimed that she was made ill both by what she had seen and by what she feared she had eaten: namely, the rotting carcass of a presumed gastropod. She later fell ill and a physician diagnosed her with gastroenteritis. She commenced a claim against the manufacturer of the ginger beer. The case went all the way to the House of Lords where they ruled for Evans.

It was the speech of Lord Wright that was most influential. He said: ``You must take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions which you can reasonably foresee would be likely to injure your neighbour. Who, then, in law is my neighbour? The answer seems to be -persons who are so closely and directly affected by my act that I ought reasonably to have them in contemplation as being so affected when I am directing my mind to the acts or omissions which are called in question.''

This `neighbour principle' was, and to a certain extent still is, the foundation of the modern law of negligence.

QUOSTIONS:

1. The facts- List 5 Facts about the Case

2. The issue(s)- List 5 Issues regarding the case ( question format)

3.The court's decision

4. The court's reasoning supporting the decision- List minimum of 3 reasons, site Law where applicable.

5. Conclusion: Do you agree with the outcome? Why or why not? Justify your answer.

a. Agree/not

b. Why or why not

c. Your own personal justification/rationale expanding on why or why not

Answer rating: 100% (QA)

1 The facts 1 Mrs Evans sat in a caf with a friend on Saturday September 10th 2 The friend ordered and paid for ginger beer which came in a bottle mad... View the full answer