Chat with AIExam 3: Introduction to Torts
The Ozark Carnival Corp (OCC) owns a traveling fairground that it operates in shopping mall parking lots.It hired Cletus to run "The Splasher," which is one of its amusement rides.It provided Cletus with the most extensive training possible.Nevertheless, while operating The Splasher, Cletus carelessly failed to fasten the safety harness on Celia, a five-year-old passenger.Celia was thrown from the ride and suffered serious injuries.Cletus has admitted liability in negligence.Unfortunately, he has no money with which to pay Celia's damages.The court also held OCC vicariously liable for Celia's injuries.Identify and briefly explain three possible justifications for the doctrine of vicarious liability.
(43) 
VerifiedThe text provided three possible justifications for the doctrine of vicarious liability.
-
First, it serves the compensatory function of tort law because it allows Celia to claim damages from both Cletus (who has no money) and OCC (which is more likely to have money, or at least liability insurance), both of whom could have reasonably anticipated the risk of this harm arising from negligent use of the product.
Second, vicarious liability may serve the deterrence function of tort law by providing OCC with an incentive to avoid unusually hazardous activities and to hire the best people available.Although OCC properly trained Cletus, it may be that he was beyond hope, from a risk management perspective.For instance, he may be the sort of person who simply does not pay attention, regardless of how much training he receives.Furthermore, OCC should realize that carnival rides are inherently dangerous and perhaps are not appropriate for small children, who cannot watch out for their own interests, under any circumstances.
And finally, it may be, as a matter of fairness that OCC should take responsibility for the losses that its activities create, even if those losses are caused by the carelessness of well-trained employees.If OCC wants the profits associated with the operation of the risky business of a traveling carnival, it arguably should have to accept the costs as well.
Nelson successfully sued Horatio in tort.The court awarded an injunction, nominal damages, and punitive damages.It therefore must be true that Horatio deliberately breached an obligation that he owed to Nelson in connection with a strict liability tort.
(40) VerifiedFalse
Cheyenne committed the tort of battery against Joey.A court held that Joey is entitled to recover damages from her.Identify and briefly explain three types of damages that the court might have awarded.
(30) VerifiedThe court probably awarded compensatory damages.Such damages would be intended to compensate Joey for the losses and injuries that he suffered as a result of the battery.For instance, he might receive damages with respect to medical bills that he incurred or income that he lost as a result of being unable to work.
Battery is actionable per se.That means that Cheyenne committed the tort merely because she made offensive bodily contact with Joey.Joey was entitled to successfully sue even if he did not suffer any loss or damage as a result of the tort.(Indeed, as discussed in Malette v Shulman, which is cited in Chapter 4, the plaintiff may succeed in an action for battery even if the defendant's actions were actually beneficial, so long as they were unwanted.) In that case, Joey would have received nominal damages.Such damages involve a very small amount of money (eg $10) and are intended to symbolize that the defendant acted wrongfully, even though she did not cause any harm.
Finally, the court might have awarded punitive damages.Such damages are awarded in addition to either compensatory damages or nominal damages.They are intended to express the court's disapproval at the defendant's outrageous conduct.They deter future wrongdoing and impose a punishment on the wrongdoer.They would be appropriate, for instance, if Cheyenne's battery was particularly harsh, vindictive, high-handed, reprehensible, or malicious.
Sinead owns a cottage that has been in her family for generations.Until recently, the natural beauty of the property was enhanced by surrounding forest, which consisted of old-growth trees that had taken generations to reach full maturity.Sinead was therefore devastated when she last visited her cottage and discovered that all of those trees had been cut down and dragged away.It was not difficult to identify the culprit.Xarol Developments Inc had purchased a number of nearby properties with the intention of building new, luxury cottages for the high-end market.In order to add to the value of those properties, Xarol had entered onto Sinead's land and cut down her trees, thereby allowing the new cottages that it was building to have unobstructed views of the nearby lake.Xarol has admitted to committing a trespass to land and has offered to pay for the value of the trees.It does so secure in the knowledge that it would still reap a substantial profit of $100 000 from its actions as a result of being able to sell its new cottages for higher prices.Sinead disagrees.She believes that she is entitled, in addition to compensatory damages for her loss, to punitive damages worth $5 million.She settled on that figure after watching a television program that dealt with punitive damages in American courts.(She could not find a similar program on Canadian law.) Is a Canadian court likely to award punitive damages? If so, it is likely to award punitive damages worth $5 million? Explain your answer.
(37) Suneeta successfully sued Olaf in tort.In this situation, it is accurate to say that while Olaf's primary obligation was imposed by law, his secondary obligation was voluntarily created.
(41) Case Brief 3.2 discusses the Supreme Court of Canada's decision in Non-Marine Underwriters, Lloyds of London v.Scalera.As a result of that decision
(35) Steven committed a trespass to Rundeep's land by building a fence on her property.He did so in the belief that the property actually belonged to him.Steven has a liability insurance policy that he purchased from Burlington Life & Accident Ltd (BLA).Which of the following statements is TRUE?
(26) During an argument in a nightclub, Marie deliberately slapped Caesar's face.She had done so many times before, with few consequences.On this occasion, however, the slap caused Caesar to suffer a blood clot that led to a serious injury.The medical evidence indicates that Caesar had always suffered from a rare condition that made him unusually vulnerable to such complications.Neither Caesar nor Marie had any way of knowing about that pre-existing condition.Which of the following statements is TRUE?
(36) Darius, a security professional, agreed to guard Myrna's house.That contract contained a number of terms.One clause required Darius to "take every precaution possible to ensure that no personal belongings are improperly removed from the house." In fact, Darius himself stole several objects of art from Myrna's house.Darius has committed
(39) Most alternative compensation schemes apply only if an injury is the result of a wrongful act.
(30) Case Brief 3.2 discussed the Supreme Court of Canada's decision in Non-Marine Underwriters, Lloyd's of London v Scalera.Which of the following statements is TRUE?
(32) Beverley, who is a Canadian judge, has just heard the parties' arguments in a tort case.Given the complexity of the situation, she feels the need to research the relevant law before she gives her decision.Which of the following statements is TRUE?
(34) Makayla successfully sued Deacon for the tort of defamation.In that situation, the term "tortfeasor" refers to
(28) Which of the following statements is true regarding alternative compensation schemes?
(36) Teach Inc.sold a computer consulting business to Blackbeard Corp.Blackbeard was persuaded to enter into that sale contract by documents that Teach had produced that suggested that Blackbeard would enjoy a profit of $1 000 000.In fact, as Teach knew, the business was really worth far less.As a result of purchasing the business, Blackbeard has actually suffered a total loss of $400 000.Blackbeard has successfully sued Teach in both tort and contract.Though it may also be entitled to other relief, Blackbeard is entitled to damages of
(35) Paine Enterprises sued Montesquieu Corp.in tort.The court held that there had been a failure to mitigate damages.This means that
(35) Which of the following statements is TRUE with respect to the comparison between a tort and a contract?
(34) Terry committed a tort against Julia by using her computer, without her permission, while she was away on vacation.Which of the following statements is TRUE?
(34) Sasha committed a tort against Katarina.Katarina wants to recover compensatory damages.Identify and briefly explain two doctrines that may limit the amount of money that she actually receives.
(32) Felipe bought a liability insurance policy.That policy included a clause that excluded coverage for injuries inflicted through "intentional or criminal acts." Felipe deliberately broke a bottle over a store clerk's head during a robbery.Because of the compensatory function of tort law, a court will require the insurance company to pay damages to the victim of the wrong, but it will also give the insurance company the right to sue Felipe for that same amount.
(30) 
Filters
- Essay(0)
- Multiple Choice(0)
- Short Answer(0)
- True False(0)
- Matching(0)