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 'om all liability however caused.\" Halfway through the course, their raft (piloted by one of the attraction staff) ipped over, an event considered as all part of the \"extreme\" factor. Both Zhao and Henry were wearing life-jackets. Henry was thrown to one side from the raft, and broke his hip in collision with a submerged rock. Zhao was initially unhurt, and both men were carried on the current to the lagoon at the end of the course. A Fearsome boat was waiting for them, and its crew used a hooked pole to snare the loops of their lifejackets. In thrusting forward with the pole, the crewman seriously sliced Zhao's hand. Henry spent three months in a cast before he could work again, and Zhao missed six weeks of work. Supplementary Facts Plaintiff - Henry could not work for 3 months and is requesting compensation for his loss of earnings in that time period - Afterwards, Henry worked modied hours as he needed to do physiotherapy after spending 3 months in a cast due to his injuries - Henry feels that he is owed a loss of earning for having to reduce his hours in order to go to doctor and physiotherapy appointments - Because Henry was potentially immobile due to his hip breaking, he had to have home care - Zhao also missed 6 weeks of work. and is also requesting compensation for his loss of earnings in that time period - Neither Zhao nor Henry were intoxicated prior to embarking on the rafting excursion - No search for alcohol, food and other beverages were performed on the plaintis prior to embarking on the excursion. Defendant: - Waiver signed by both plaintiffs stated \"I release the operator and its employees 'om all liability from the risk and dangers of white-water rafting\"- - Fearsome White Water rafting employees performed their normal safety checks to ensure all customers are physically and mentally suitable to proceed on the raft. - The staff at the lagoon told everyone on the raft that they would be retrieved by their lifejacket and should not grab for the pole. - Zhao reached out for the pole as the employee was thrusting it towards him, contributing to his injury. A sign posted on the dock read "Participants who are intoxicated are prohibited from participating in any white-water rafting excursions." The plaintiffs were behaving very loud and recklessly on the raft and would not remain seated. A staff member recounts Henry making countless gestures about jumping overboard It was not until halfway through the raft ride that a staff member noticed both of the plaintiffs had hidden a flask in his pocket and were drinking from it. Staff members were not allowed to physically frisk customers and their belongings beforehand due to COVID-19 health and safety protocols. Zhao and Henry treated their injuries as humorous jokes (most likely from their level of intoxication), and the staff did not realize the severity of the injuries until much later. The on-site medical team were all busy performing tests and screening for COVID-19 on all customers entering the vicinity and tending to others at that time they were called for Henry and Zhao's injuries. When the paramedics were called they took twice as long to arrive due to grid-locked traffic. You are to prepare your decision in the case and explain what pertinent details or legal theory you used to render your decision. Your decision must include: Pertinent details that influenced your decision What legal principles were applied What damages were reasonably owed (if any) to the plaintiff and why? What damages were not owed to the plaintiff and why? In a separate section, you are to provide case law examples applicable in support of your decision. You are to provide (2) two new cases support of your position