Marilyn and Thomas Cooke own a semi-detached property. They have one year old twins, Timothy and Tina. The Cookes are angry at their neighbour, Oscar Crouch, who occupies the other side of the semi-detached property.For the past three or four weeks Oscar has been playing his television at top volume preventing the twins from sleeping. Thomas tried to talk to Oscar about it a couple of times, but Oscar did not answer his door when Thomas knocked.Thomas thinks Oscar has been avoiding him.

Marilyn believes that Oscar is a heavy drinker because she often sees him stacking crates of empty beer and wine bottles in his garage.One afternoon, Marilyn was taking the twins to the local park to meet mothers from her mothers' group when she saw Oscar lurch unsteadily out of his house and down the steps, get in his car, and drive off. At the park down the street Marilyn told two of the mothers in the group, Amelia Evans and Lois Clarke, that Oscar is a big drinker who regularly drives under the influence of alcohol.Amelia and Lois encouraged Marilyn to call the police the next time she saw anything suspicious.

Three days later Marilyn saw Oscar stumble down his steps and lurch down the path to his garage.She called his name, but Oscar just got in his car and drove away. Marilyn decided to call 911 to report Oscar as an impaired driver.She gave the 911 operator Oscar's licence plate number.

Constable Joanne Kerr happened to be driving behind a rather slow-moving vehicle when she heard the dispatcher's report of the call and noticed that the licence plate of the car in front of her was a match.She followed the vehicle for two blocks and then had the driver of the vehicle pull over.A breathalyzer test was administered, but according to the roadside breathalyzer results Oscar was not impaired by alcohol. However, during roadside sobriety testing Oscar was unable to walk in a straight line.He also gave the officer answers that did not always relate to the questions the officer had asked. Constable Kerr believed Oscar to be impaired by drugs.As a result, he was charged with impaired driving and was taken to the police station for further testing.After additional testing Oscar was released and charges were withdrawn. Oscar was able to satisfy Constable Kerr that his unsteadiness was a result of an ear infection for which he had been prescribed medication. In fact, when he was stopped by Constable Kerr Oscar was on his way to his doctor's office to have his ear checked because he did not feel the medication he had been prescribed was working. Oscar's doctor, given permission by her patient, confirmed to police that the ear infection of three weeks' duration had affected both Oscar's hearing and his balance. She further confirmed that the ear drops she had prescribed would not have impaired Oscar's ability to drive.

It turns out that Oscar's granddaughter had asked Oscar to collect empty bottles of beer, liquor, and wine for a bottle drive to benefit her baseball team.Oscar had been diligently collecting empty bottles from all his friends and stacking them in his garage.

a)Identify two torts that may apply in these circumstances which may give Oscar grounds to raise a civil suit, and test the elements of those torts against the scenario to determine whether an action based on either tort is likely to succeed. Provide reasons for your answer, with proper reference to the fact situation and the law. (12 marks)

Question 2

Joseph an accountant prepared financial statements for Pentagon Ltd pursuant to a review engagement, which is an intermediate form of financial reporting, less onerous than an audit and more onerous than a compilation engagement, requiring the accountant to make inquiries of management and perform certain analytical procedures to determine if the financial information contained in the client's records is plausible. Pentagon Ltd. failed to remit over $1 million in provincial retail sales tax during the period December 1985 to December 1991. Notices of assessment were issued by the Ministry of Revenue demanding payment of the unremitted tax plus interest and a 25 per cent penalty. The unremitted sales tax was treated by Joseph as revenue of Pentagon Ltd, which resulted in an overpayment of income tax in the amount of approximately $220,000. Eighty per cent of that amount was eventually recovered.

Pentagon Ltd sued Joseph in court.

Note - "The Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants ("CICA") Handbook requires that the accountant has sufficient knowledge of the business to make intelligent inquiries and that the accountant possess an appreciation of matters that could have a significant effect on the information being reported on"

The CICA Handbook sets out the professional standards that apply to accountants in conducting a review engagement. The CICA Handbook explains that a review engagement consists "primarily of enquiry, analytical procedures and discussion related to information supplied to the public accountant by the enterprise with the limited objective of assessing whether the information being reported on is plausible within the framework of appropriate criteria". "Plausible" is defined as "appearing to be worthy of belief based on the information obtained by the public accountant in connection with the review".

The CICA Handbook also stipulates that an accountant must apply "analytical procedures such as comparing the current and prior period information and considering the reasonableness of financial and other inter-relationship..."

Applying the relevant and correct principle(s) of law discuss the following questions:

a) Identify and explain the most applicable legal concept. With particular attention to the details of the scenario above, test the elements of the legal concept against the scenario above to determine whether an action in court is likely to succeed. Provide reasons for your answer, with proper reference to the fact situation and the law. (6 marks).

b) Discuss the remedy(s) if any, available to any of the parties. Ensure to name the party to whom the remedy outlined is available. (4 marks).

Question 3

Amritha Singh is a middle manager with Coaster Plus Ltd (Coasters), a company that designs and manufactures roller coasters for amusement parks across North America. She has been appointed one of the project managers for the design and delivery of a special roller coaster for the Ultimate Park Ltd, an American customer. A major component of the project is the steel tracking, and one possible source is Trackers Canada Ltd (Trackers). Amritha's supervisor has asked her to negotiate the necessary contract. Amritha began negotiations with Jason Hughes. Jason is a representative of Trackers, the steel tracking manufacturer willing to supply tracking to Coasters, Amritha's employer. Amritha provided Jason with the plans and specifications for the roller coaster, and they negotiated a number of points, including price, delivery dates, and tracking quality. A short time later, Jason offered to sell Coasters a total of 900 metres of track in accordance with the plans and specifications provided. Jason's offer contained, among other matter, the purchase price ($1.5 million), delivery date, terms of payment, insurance obligations concerning the track, and a series of warranties related to the quality and performance of the tracking to be supplied. There was also a clause, inserted at Amritha's express request, which required Trackers to pay $5000 to Coasters for every day it was late in delivering the tracking.

After renewing the offer several days, Amritha for several days, Amritha contacted Jason and said, "You drive a hard bargain, and there are aspects of your offer that I'm not entirely happy with. However, I accept your offer on behalf of my company. I'm looking forward to doing business with you."

Within a month, Trackers faced a 20% increase in manufacturing costs owing to an unexpected shortage in steel. Jason contacted Amritha to explain this development and worried aloud that without an agreement from Coasters to pay 20% more for the tracking, Trackers would be unable to make its delivery date. Amritha received instructions from her supervisor to agree to the increased purchase price in order to ensure timely delivery. Amritha communicated this news to Jason, who thanked her profusely for being so cooperative and understanding.

Jason kept his word and the tracking was delivered on time. However, Coasters has now determined that its profit margin on the American deal is lower than expected, and it is looking for ways to cut costs Amritha is told by her boss to let Jason know that Coasters will not be paying the 20% price increase and will remit payment only in the amount set out in the contract. Jason and Trackers are stunned by this development.

Applying the relevant principle(s) of contract law discuss the following questions:

a) Whether the negotiations between Jason and Amritha have legal consequences.

b) Discuss specific applicable ways by which each party mentioned above could have avoided the contract and as well as the implications of each way identified.

c) Discuss the consequences of the instruction of Amritha's boss to the effect that Coasters will not be paying the 20% price increase and will remit payment only in the amount set out in the contract.