subject business law

Part 1:

Based on belowreading, Answer the following questions using your own words and based on your understanding of the principles.

Answering Problem based Question In Law

Sample Question on Law of Negligence Last Friday evening, as Jon were leaving McKing, a fast-food restaurant, he slipped over a puddle of ice-cream spilled by another customer near the restaurant exit. Jon severely sprained his ankle and consequently he was unable to participate in a futsal tournament in which his team has qualify into the final. Discuss whether Jon can successfully sue McKing under negligence. (15 Marks) Instruction: Use the IRAC (Issue, Rule, Apply and Conclude) method to answer the problem given. Sample Question on Law of Negligence I - Issue What is the issue/problem that the question asked you to address? In this case, the issue is you must decide whether Jon will be successful if he were to sue McKing for his injury. So, in this case - for the issue statement, you can write something like this: 'The issue in this case is whether Jon can successfully sue McKing for negligence? ** Tips: Issue statement MUST always end with a question mark - because this is what we want to find out a good issues statement will have the plaintiff (in the case above - Jon), the defendant (McKing) and the law (negligence) Sample Question on Law of Negligence R - Rule To determine whether a plaintiff will be successful or not in suing the defendant under negligence, the law requires the plaintiff to prove THREE (3) elements of negligence: Duty of care, Breach of Duty, Causation. Therefore in the Rule part of the answer, students are expected to briefly explain the meaning of each element : Duty of care - explain what is duty, when does it exist, to whom we owe duty to take care. Basically you will be explaining the neighborhood principle. (Cont'd) Sample Question on Law of Negligence Breach of Duty - explain how duty is breached - explain concept of reasonable man and the factors that the court will take into considerations Causation and Injury - explain the but-for test - the need to establish a link of causation between breach and the injury Support your explanation of the element with at least one case that will support your answer later. ** in the rule part - you just explain the legal principles of the rule. Do not touch anything about the situation between Jon and McKing yet - this will only be done in the application part Sample Question on Law of Negligence A - Application In Application - this is where we will apply the rule to the facts given to us in the present case. Therefore we examine the facts one by one and relate them to the rule. Does Duty to Take Care exist between Jon and McKing? (Why?) Exist because customers are their neighbors - persons who the restaurant could reasonably foresee to be affected by any of their action or omission. If a restaurant operator do or did not so something to ensure the safety of the customers, then the customers might be injured. Therefore, McKing has a duty to take care of the customers (Jon). Sample Question on Law of Negligence Breach of Duty (How?) Breach of duty is when a party did something below the standard of a reasonable man, taking into consideration the practicality or taking precaution and the magnitude of the risk. So in this case - did McKing acted according to the standard of reasonable man? What would other restaurant do when they have spillage? Here McKing did not wipe up the spill - can that be considered as breach? Assume other restaurants would have not left spills on the floor - inviting accidents to happen. (cont'd) Sample Question on Law of Negligence What about the other factors - degree of risk, practicality of precaution? In terms of risk - due to high number of customers in a restaurant - probability of injury happening due to the spillage is high. In term of practicality - because of the increased risk - then it would be proper and justified to take extra precaution and appoint an employee to oversee the wiping up of spills in the restaurant. Arguably the answer is McKing did not act according to the standard - therefore they breached their duty to take care. Sample Question on Law of Negligence Causation The breach i.e. not wiping up the floor is the direct cause of the ankle injury What about the loss of chance to play in the tournament? Is it something foreseeable and related to the injury? In all probability is YES, as physical injury would affect one's ability to move - not too remote Defense: Contributory negligence - by not being careful when walking However the contribution might be just minimal. Sample Question on Law of Negligence C - Conclude Therefore given the argument above where McKing has a duty to take care of all customers (including Jon) and the fact that they have breached their duty by not acting as they should given the degree of risk involved and such breach was the direct cause of the injury suffered - in conclusion - Jon would be successful in his claim against the restaurant for their negligence. Sample Question on Law of Negligence For the sample given above - Total marks is 15 The usual division of marks would be: Issue - no marks - students just provide the right issue Rule - 6 marks - 2 marks each for discussion on duty, breach and causation + case law If no case law given - max 5 marks Application and Conclusion - 9 marks 2 marks on discussion on why duty of care exist 4 marks on discussion regarding breach of duty 1 mark on causation 2 marks for discussion on contributory negligence If no case laws - max 8 marks Sample Question on Law of Negligence As a rule - marks allocation for the application part will always be more than marks for the rule For the rule - students basically regurgitate what they understood about the law ( can copy from the book and/or slides because you are not inventing your own rule) It is in the application part where the need to use their analytical and critical thinking skills

Sample Question on Law of Negligence Last Friday evening, as Jon were leaving McKing, a fast-food restaurant, he slipped over a puddle of ice-cream spilled by another customer near the restaurant exit. Jon severely sprained his ankle and consequently he was unable to participate in a futsal tournament in which his team has qualify into the final. Discuss whether Jon can successfully sue McKing under negligence. (15 Marks) Instruction: Use the IRAC (Issue, Rule, Apply and Conclude) method to answer the problem given. Sample Question on Law of Negligence I - Issue What is the issue/problem that the question asked you to address? In this case, the issue is you must decide whether Jon will be successful if he were to sue McKing for his injury. So, in this case - for the issue statement, you can write something like this: 'The issue in this case is whether Jon can successfully sue McKing for negligence? ** Tips: Issue statement MUST always end with a question mark - because this is what we want to find out a good issues statement will have the plaintiff (in the case above - Jon), the defendant (McKing) and the law (negligence) Sample Question on Law of Negligence R - Rule To determine whether a plaintiff will be successful or not in suing the defendant under negligence, the law requires the plaintiff to prove THREE (3) elements of negligence: Duty of care, Breach of Duty, Causation. Therefore in the Rule part of the answer, students are expected to briefly explain the meaning of each element : Duty of care - explain what is duty, when does it exist, to whom we owe duty to take care. Basically you will be explaining the neighborhood principle. (Cont'd) Sample Question on Law of Negligence Breach of Duty - explain how duty is breached - explain concept of reasonable man and the factors that the court will take into considerations Causation and Injury - explain the but-for test - the need to establish a link of causation between breach and the injury Support your explanation of the element with at least one case that will support your answer later. ** in the rule part - you just explain the legal principles of the rule. Do not touch anything about the situation between Jon and McKing yet - this will only be done in the application part Sample Question on Law of Negligence A - Application In Application - this is where we will apply the rule to the facts given to us in the present case. Therefore we examine the facts one by one and relate them to the rule. Does Duty to Take Care exist between Jon and McKing? (Why?) Exist because customers are their neighbors - persons who the restaurant could reasonably foresee to be affected by any of their action or omission. If a restaurant operator do or did not so something to ensure the safety of the customers, then the customers might be injured. Therefore, McKing has a duty to take care of the customers (Jon). Sample Question on Law of Negligence Breach of Duty (How?) Breach of duty is when a party did something below the standard of a reasonable man, taking into consideration the practicality or taking precaution and the magnitude of the risk. So in this case - did McKing acted according to the standard of reasonable man? What would other restaurant do when they have spillage? Here McKing did not wipe up the spill - can that be considered as breach? Assume other restaurants would have not left spills on the floor - inviting accidents to happen. (cont'd) Sample Question on Law of Negligence What about the other factors - degree of risk, practicality of precaution? In terms of risk - due to high number of customers in a restaurant - probability of injury happening due to the spillage is high. In term of practicality - because of the increased risk - then it would be proper and justified to take extra precaution and appoint an employee to oversee the wiping up of spills in the restaurant. Arguably the answer is McKing did not act according to the standard - therefore they breached their duty to take care. Sample Question on Law of Negligence Causation The breach i.e. not wiping up the floor is the direct cause of the ankle injury What about the loss of chance to play in the tournament? Is it something foreseeable and related to the injury? In all probability is YES, as physical injury would affect one's ability to move - not too remote Defense: Contributory negligence - by not being careful when walking However the contribution might be just minimal. Sample Question on Law of Negligence C - Conclude Therefore given the argument above where McKing has a duty to take care of all customers (including Jon) and the fact that they have breached their duty by not acting as they should given the degree of risk involved and such breach was the direct cause of the injury suffered - in conclusion - Jon would be successful in his claim against the restaurant for their negligence. Sample Question on Law of Negligence For the sample given above - Total marks is 15 The usual division of marks would be: Issue - no marks - students just provide the right issue Rule - 6 marks - 2 marks each for discussion on duty, breach and causation + case law If no case law given - max 5 marks Application and Conclusion - 9 marks 2 marks on discussion on why duty of care exist 4 marks on discussion regarding breach of duty 1 mark on causation 2 marks for discussion on contributory negligence If no case laws - max 8 marks Sample Question on Law of Negligence As a rule - marks allocation for the application part will always be more than marks for the rule For the rule - students basically regurgitate what they understood about the law ( can copy from the book and/or slides because you are not inventing your own rule) It is in the application part where the need to use their analytical and critical thinking skills

Sample Question on Law of Negligence Last Friday evening, as Jon were leaving McKing, a fast-food restaurant, he slipped over a puddle of ice-cream spilled by another customer near the restaurant exit. Jon severely sprained his ankle and consequently he was unable to participate in a futsal tournament in which his team has qualify into the final. Discuss whether Jon can successfully sue McKing under negligence. (15 Marks) Instruction: Use the IRAC (Issue, Rule, Apply and Conclude) method to answer the problem given. Sample Question on Law of Negligence I - Issue What is the issue/problem that the question asked you to address? In this case, the issue is you must decide whether Jon will be successful if he were to sue McKing for his injury. So, in this case - for the issue statement, you can write something like this: 'The issue in this case is whether Jon can successfully sue McKing for negligence? ** Tips: Issue statement MUST always end with a question mark - because this is what we want to find out a good issues statement will have the plaintiff (in the case above - Jon), the defendant (McKing) and the law (negligence) Sample Question on Law of Negligence R - Rule To determine whether a plaintiff will be successful or not in suing the defendant under negligence, the law requires the plaintiff to prove THREE (3) elements of negligence: Duty of care, Breach of Duty, Causation. Therefore in the Rule part of the answer, students are expected to briefly explain the meaning of each element : Duty of care - explain what is duty, when does it exist, to whom we owe duty to take care. Basically you will be explaining the neighborhood principle. (Cont'd) Sample Question on Law of Negligence Breach of Duty - explain how duty is breached - explain concept of reasonable man and the factors that the court will take into considerations Causation and Injury - explain the but-for test - the need to establish a link of causation between breach and the injury Support your explanation of the element with at least one case that will support your answer later. ** in the rule part - you just explain the legal principles of the rule. Do not touch anything about the situation between Jon and McKing yet - this will only be done in the application part Sample Question on Law of Negligence A - Application In Application - this is where we will apply the rule to the facts given to us in the present case. Therefore we examine the facts one by one and relate them to the rule. Does Duty to Take Care exist between Jon and McKing? (Why?) Exist because customers are their neighbors - persons who the restaurant could reasonably foresee to be affected by any of their action or omission. If a restaurant operator do or did not so something to ensure the safety of the customers, then the customers might be injured. Therefore, McKing has a duty to take care of the customers (Jon). Sample Question on Law of Negligence Breach of Duty (How?) Breach of duty is when a party did something below the standard of a reasonable man, taking into consideration the practicality or taking precaution and the magnitude of the risk. So in this case - did McKing acted according to the standard of reasonable man? What would other restaurant do when they have spillage? Here McKing did not wipe up the spill - can that be considered as breach? Assume other restaurants would have not left spills on the floor - inviting accidents to happen. (cont'd) Sample Question on Law of Negligence What about the other factors - degree of risk, practicality of precaution? In terms of risk - due to high number of customers in a restaurant - probability of injury happening due to the spillage is high. In term of practicality - because of the increased risk - then it would be proper and justified to take extra precaution and appoint an employee to oversee the wiping up of spills in the restaurant. Arguably the answer is McKing did not act according to the standard - therefore they breached their duty to take care. Sample Question on Law of Negligence Causation The breach i.e. not wiping up the floor is the direct cause of the ankle injury What about the loss of chance to play in the tournament? Is it something foreseeable and related to the injury? In all probability is YES, as physical injury would affect one's ability to move - not too remote Defense: Contributory negligence - by not being careful when walking However the contribution might be just minimal. Sample Question on Law of Negligence C - Conclude Therefore given the argument above where McKing has a duty to take care of all customers (including Jon) and the fact that they have breached their duty by not acting as they should given the degree of risk involved and such breach was the direct cause of the injury suffered - in conclusion - Jon would be successful in his claim against the restaurant for their negligence. Sample Question on Law of Negligence For the sample given above - Total marks is 15 The usual division of marks would be: Issue - no marks - students just provide the right issue Rule - 6 marks - 2 marks each for discussion on duty, breach and causation + case law If no case law given - max 5 marks Application and Conclusion - 9 marks 2 marks on discussion on why duty of care exist 4 marks on discussion regarding breach of duty 1 mark on causation 2 marks for discussion on contributory negligence If no case laws - max 8 marks Sample Question on Law of Negligence As a rule - marks allocation for the application part will always be more than marks for the rule For the rule - students basically regurgitate what they understood about the law ( can copy from the book and/or slides because you are not inventing your own rule) It is in the application part where the need to use their analytical and critical thinking skills

Based on your Lesson abovereading, it will help you in completing this activity. answer the following questions using your own words and based on your understanding of the principles.

1. Negligence law requires a person to take care and not to harm his 'neighbours'. In this context, explain how law determines who our 'neighbours' are so that we can exercise our duty of care towards them. ProvideONE (1)example to illustrate your answer. (5 marks)
2. Explain how the 'reasonable man' test is applied in determining whether or not the defendant has breached his duty to take care of the plaintiff. ProvideONE (1)example to support your answer.(5 marks)
3. What is contributory negligence? What would be the effect of a finding of contributory negligence against the plaintiff in a suit for negligence? Support your answer withONE (1)example/case law.(5 marks)
4. Negligence law requires a person to take care and not to harm his 'neighbours'. In this context, explain how law determines who our 'neighbours' are so that we can exercise our duty of care towards them. ProvideONE (1)example to illustrate your answer. (5 marks)
5. Explain how the 'reasonable man' test is applied in determining whether or not the defendant has breached his duty to take care of the plaintiff. ProvideONE (1)example to support your answer.(5 marks)
6. What is contributory negligence? What would be the effect of a finding of contributory negligence against the plaintiff in a suit for negligence? Support your answer withONE (1)example/case law.(5 marks)