I Question 1 ( Case studies, to be answered in PIRAC format) A Sydney light rail passenger was injured after a collision occurred between two light rail vehicles. The collision occurred due to the driver of the passenger's light rail vehicle collapsing at the controls during a medical episode. The passenger (plaintiff) has argued that the collision could have been avoided if the light rail had been fitted with a 'dead man's switch', which stops the light rail in case of an emergency involving the driver. The device had been rejected by the rail 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 light rail anywhere in the world (only on trains). Will the plaintiff succeed in his claim? Explain your reasoning