MGT LAW 3010 - ASSIGNMENT 2 CASE 12 - "SNOW TROUBLE" Jake's city home is lovely. He and his family are very happy living there. If he had to pick one downside though, it would be that the joy of owning a corner lot means that there is a lot of snow to shovel off the city sidewalk in the winter. Add in his driveway and Jake's back ached just thinking about it. One winter day, while at work, it had snowed all day. Jake was not looking forward to shovelling a mountain of snow. When he returned home, he was expecting to spend the next 90 minutes shovelling. Imagine his surprise when all the work had already been done - and very well at that! When he went inside his house, he asked his family who had done the shoveling and neither his wife nor children knew what he was talking about. They had not done the work. Jake was stumped. Who did the work ? For the next month, every day it snowed, someone had mysteriously shoveled Jake's sidewalks and driveway when he was away at work. Several days later, he received an envelope in the mail with the business name Sammy's Superior Landscaping Ltd. ("SSL)" on it, and it was addressed to Jake. Inside was an invoice in the amount of $300.00 for the snow shoveling that had been done the previous month. This was puzzling as no one from Jake's home had asked SSL to do this work. Jake had never even heard of SSL. Jake called his friends and neighbours and determined that no one he knew had caused this work to be done. Jake was not necessarily opposed to the idea of having someone else do the snow shoveling but he did not like the idea that this work had been done without him asking for it. Jake did not pay the invoice. On December 1, he received a call from SSL asking about payment. He said he would not pay for a service he did not request and thanked them for the free snow shoveling. SSL sent the bill to a collection agency which added a $150.00 collection fee and started pursuing Jake for $450.00. Jake still did not pay. In January, Jake was served with a Civil Claim which had been filed in the Alberta Court of Justice, Small Claims Division, by SSL. The claim sought payment of $750.00 for breach of contract, interest owed, and legal fees. The attorney representing the plaintiff contacted Jake and said that to avoid a trial, the plaintiff would settle for payment of $500.00. Jake thought this whole situation was ridiculous since he had not been responsible for any of it. He contacted Global News and spoke to the Consumer Affairs reporter. A few days later he gave a televised interview in which he clearly and accurately set out the facts listed above. He warned others about this poor business practice. A week later, he 1 |Page N 37 video amazon music X 1X F4 PrtSen Home En F5 F6 F7 F8 F9 % &was served with another Civil Claim filed by SSL, suing him for injurious falsehood. The plaintiff sought damages in the amount of $25,000.00. A third claim was also filed by SSL and its employee Wilbur against Jake for negligence and occupier's liability. The claim correctly alleged that one of SSL's employees (Wilbur) had injured himself while performing the above noted snow shoveling services on Jake's property. The injuries occurred when Wilbur was shoveling snow off the font step. He leaned against the step's railing and the railway gave way, causing Wilbur to fall and injure his back. He was unable to work for three months as a result. The claim is for $25,000.00 in lost wages, medical expenses, and pain and suffering. Jake was aware that the railing was unstable and needed to be repaired or replaced. Jake knows he must deal with this mess as it clearly is not going away. He also knows that you have taken the prestigious Business Law course at the University of Lethbridge. Jake has asked you to advise him as follows: 1) For the first civil action, does SSL have a valid claim against Jake for breach of contract? He wants you to explain the relevant contract law principles and applicable case law to him so that he can decide whether to fight this claim or just give up. 2) Does Jake have any valid cause of action against SSL or any of SSL's employees? If so, for what and what remedy should Jake seek? Explain the relevant law. 3) For the second civil action (injurious falsehood), explain Jake's legal position and advise him as to what he should do. 4) For the third civil action (negligence and occupier's liability), explain Jake's legal position and advise him as to what he should do. 5) If SSL had been dissolved by the government for failing to file an annual return prior to this snow shoveling nonsense, would that impact your answer to any of the above questions? 6) Does the fact that Jake does not have homeowner's liability insurance impact his liability position? N 37 video amazon music