Paul owns Sonic Boom Music Inc. He is also a car enthusiast and, since business has been quite good, he has purchased several vehicles for both business use and personal use. Unfortunately, he himself has been involved in several car accidents recently.

While transporting company goods in the company van, an employee named Henry mistakenly ran through a red light and crashed into another car. Henry admitted to the police officer who arrived at the scene that he was driving while prohibited (owing to a DUI charge, which Paul did not know about). Susan, the driver of the car Henry hit, is seeking damages for the injuries she suffered, which includes a broken left arm. Henry honestly says that he cannot possibly afford to pay for any damage as he does not have any insurance.

On the same day as the car accident, a client of Paul's came into Sonic Boom Music to buy some rock memorabilia. The client, named Sonny, slipped on the wet floor of the shop as it had been recently mopped. Sonny landed on his back and could not move after he fell. He has a history of back problems and recently had an operation to repair a slipped disc. Janet, the employee who mopped the floor, has been told, on many occasions by Paul, to make sure to put out the "Caution Wet Floor" sign on the floor after mopping; however, she consistently forgets to do so. Janet found Sonny lying on the floor after slipping and she tried to move him to a couch near the back of the store by dragging him there. Janet is 19 years old and this is her first job.

2) Contribute to the solution by explaining how ONE of the negligence ingredients applies to the scenario above and/or how ONE of the tests used is applied to prove a negligence ingredient. You must limit yourself to either ONE ingredient or ONE test in order to give other students a chance to have something to post. The goal is to have a answer to this legal scenario by the end of the week by adding all the student posts together. Please limit your contribution to allow others to add to the solution. Towards the end of the week, there should be an opportunity for students to comment on elements beyond Table 5.1 (such as potential defences and how concepts such as vicarious liability may apply).