Scenario 2

Fatima works at the Kempston 'Living History' Museum as a part-time assistant. Her agreement with the museum provides that she is self-employed. It also states that she is free to either accept or reject work when it is offered to her and that she can decide when to take holidays. She is only paid for the hours she actually works. She is supplied with a uniform which she has to wear and she is required to obey the reasonable orders of the museum's manager. For the last two years she has always worked on Saturdays and Sundays and has been offered extra hours during school holidays (including half-term holidays). On 23 October 2013, during half-term, Georgina, a girl in a wheelchair, was visiting the museum with her mother, Harriet. Harriet was pushing Georgina's wheelchair. There were steps leading from the entrance hall into the museum and a lift for wheelchair users. Fatima helped Georgina and her mother to use the lift. When Fatima shut the gate of the lift, she unfortunately closed its on Georgina's fingers and fractured Georgina's finger.

Scenario 2 Questions 1.

1 Explain the legal tests for establishing whether or not a duty of care exists in negligence with case (9 marks)

2 Applying these tests, explain whether Fatima owes a duty of care to Georgina with case (5 marks)

(Total: 14 marks)

3) what a claimant must show to establish that a tort was committed in the 'course of employment'; (4 marks)

4 who may be liable to Georgina for the injury caused to her finger if Fatima is held to be an employee of the museum. (4 marks)

(Total: 8 marks)