Z. Ting & Mohammed v. Fearsome White-Water Rafting Ltd.

Zhao Ting and Henry Mohammed set out for a day of fun at the Fearsome White-Water Rafting attraction. They both signed a waiver stating they "release the operator and its employees from all liability however caused" in bold font on the first page. The waiver noted that this sport was an extreme sport and as such, the risks to their safety are extreme as well. An explanation of the severity of injuries including death were listed in fine print at the bottom of the third page of the waiver. As Zhao and Henry wanted to join the next raft which was set to depart in15 minutes, the two quickly signed the waiver and confirmed their ability to swim as the tour guides stated anyone unable to swim were not allowed to participate.

The plaintiffs (Zhao and Henry) were fitted for life jackets by the trained guides. It is the responsibility of the guides to ensure the lifejackets fit appropriately as they are trained proper fitting techniques which includes measuring gaps between the body and jacket. Both Zhao and Henry were wearing lifejackets however Henry's was noticeably too large. Henry made a comment to Zhao about his life jacket size, stating "this one might be too large". A guide different than the one who fit Henry with the initial jacket overheard Henry and offered him a different size. Henry declined stating he was fine with the one provided.

Halfway through the course, their raft (piloted by one of the guides) flipped over. This is an event considered as all part of the "extreme" factor. Henry was thrown into the water and as his life jacket was too large, he slipped out of his life jacket. Henry did not know how to swim and as such, without the life jacket he was carried by the currents downstream and fell unconscious while also striking his hip on a large submerged rock. Luckily, he was pulled to safety by operating staff just in time. The staff used a hooked pole that is often used for rescuing in rafting excursions. The pole is intended to hook along the belt loop on a life jacket but the guide was able to hook the belt loop on Henry's pants and pull him out of the water.

Zhao, a prodigious violinist on a full scholarship, was initially unhurt as his life jacket allowed him to remain afloat. Although he is an experienced swimmer, Zhao panicked as the crew used a hooked pole to snare the loops of his lifejacket. While Zhao was waving his arms in the air, the guide attempted to hook the belt loop on Zhao's jacket and unintentionally seriously sliced Zhao's hand.

ADDITIONAL FACTS:

- Zhao's hand became infected despite receiving medical attention at the hospital. His wound created permanent nerve damage and as a result, Zhao is no longer able to play violin to the caliber he once was able to. Zhao subsequently lost his scholarship.

- Zhao fell into a deep depression as he had not graduated from his program, leaving him with unfinished education as he could not afford his schooling without a scholarship.

- As he did not have a completed degree, Zhao will now need to pursue alternate work.

- Henry has been diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder following his neardrowning experience and has taken a sick leave from work for a period of 4 months.

- His company does not have a short-term disability plan (he does not receive money while off work) and has fallen behind in multiple bill payments which affected his credit rating.

- Henry was in the process of purchasing a home for his new family as a single father and due to this credit rating, he was unable to purchase the home he was interested in. Had his credit rating not been affected, he would have met the criteria for the home.

Plaintiffs Z. Ting and H. Mohammed are looking to be made whole in receiving the following damages:

1. Zhao is claiming damages owing for the full amount of his scholarship $100,000.00 2. Zhao is claiming damages related to medical expenses for his hand for $340,00.00 3. Zhao is claiming damages related to his counselling and mental health struggles (including pain and suffering) for a total of $10,000.00

4. Zhao is claiming damages related to loss of projected income as he was on track to become a professional violinist for a total of $400,000.00.

_________________________________________________

1. Henry is claiming damages related to his counselling and mental health struggles (including pain and suffering) for a total of $50,000.00

2. Henry is claiming damages related to medical expenses for his hip for $40,000.00 3. Henry is claiming damages related to loss of income for the period of 4 months at $100,000. Henry is a housekeeper at an unpopular hotel.

4. Henry is claiming damages for $300,000.00 as this was the cost of the home he was intending to purchase prior to his credit history declining

Task

Part A.

Using the case above, you will assume the role of a judge and decide if the plaintiffs are entitled to all damages they are seeking. If you agree with the damage but believe the cost is too high, or if you believe the plaintiff is not entitled to the full amount, you must provide an alternate amount. You do not need to be accurate in your proposed amount if different than the amount provided. In essay format, you will provide a decision for Zhao and for Henry separately. These should be two separate sections in your assignment.

NOTE

In order to solidify and strengthen your position, you may enhance or add facts to the case as long as they do not contradict the original facts provided. In other words, if the case did not indicate the colour of the shirt Zhao was wearing, you would be able to identify a colour of your choosing. If the case did state Zhao was wearing a red shirt, you would not be able to change the colour of his shirt. This hint is to guide you in identifying if there are any gaps in the case.

Part B.

You will act as the judge and present the following:

1. The damages you are in agreement with (and amounts) for the plaintiffs (Zhao and Henry) if any.

2. Your rationale for supporting any position of the defendant (White Water Rafting), if applicable.

3. Identify at least (1) recommendation for White Water Rafting for future practices.