Exam 5: Unintentional Interference With Persons or Property

A and B entered a variety store owned byC. A purchased two chocolate bars from C, and gave one toB. Unknown to A, B, or C the chocolate bar which A gave to B contained a piece of metal that had fallen into the chocolate mix when the candy bar was made. When B attempted to eat the chocolate, she damaged one of her teeth. She was obliged to have the tooth repaired by a dentist, and in addition, lost a day's work because of the painful injury to her mouth. Her total loss amounted to $300.00. The manufacturer is vicariously liable for the negligence of his employees in the making of the chocolate bar.

A and B entered a variety store owned byC. A purchased two chocolate bars from C, and gave one toB. Unknown to A, B, or C the chocolate bar which A gave to B contained a piece of metal that had fallen into the chocolate mix when the candy bar was made. When B attempted to eat the chocolate, she damaged one of her teeth. She was obliged to have the tooth repaired by a dentist, and in addition, lost a day's work because of the painful injury to her mouth. Her total loss amounted to $300.00 The only person liable for B's injury would be the employee of the manufacturer who made the chocolate bar.

Miss Haversham, a guest at a wedding catered by Giardia's Fine Foods, became violently ill, as did several other guests. It is later found that only those who ate the crab salad appetizer became ill. If Miss Haversham were to sue for negligence, she would normally have to prove

Ping drove his automobile into a parking lot and, in doing so, collided with the side of a parked automobile that was owned by Nelson. Because a motor vehicle is a dangerous object, Ping is strictly liable for any damage caused by his vehicle.

Dave was injured in a hang-gliding accident at a hang-gliding school, and would like to sue the owners of the school. Before they would allow him to take classes, the owners of the school had Dave sign a document which said that the school would not be responsible, legally or physically, for Dave's safety. This kind of document is called a release.

Which of the following is a NOT a defence to negligence?

Jacques captured a large rattlesnake while on a camping trip, and brought it home to his apartment in the city. He kept the snake in a glass aquarium which he had covered with a wire screen. One day, after feeding the snake, he accidentally failed to fasten down the screen cover, and the snake escaped from the aquarium. The snake managed to enter the adjoining apartment by way of an open balcony door. The occupant of the adjoining apartment was bitten and seriously injured when she accidentally stepped on the snake Jacques would not be liable for the injury to his neighbour, because she was bitten as a result of her own carelessness.

On a cold winter day, A slipped on the icy sidewalk at the entrance to B's shop. A injured her ankle as a result of the fall, and B hired a taxi to have her taken to the hospital to have her injured ankle examined. On the way to the hospital another automobile collided with the taxi, and A was seriously injured. B is liable for the injury to A as a result of the automobile accident, because she would not have been travelling in the taxi if she had not injured her ankle at B's store.

James and Mary are artists who have a studio in an industrial part of the city. They decide to live in the studio, which is not against local zoning bylaws, but find themselves disturbed at night by the noise and light from a nearby railway marshalling yard. They decide to institute a nuisance suit against the railway since their enjoyment of their property has been seriously affected. They will be unsuccessful.

Manish, a hairdresser, applied too much peroxide to Meagan's hair when he was colouring it, causing it to break off at the roots. Meagan will be held to the standard of care of the reasonable hairdresser.

A and B entered a variety store owned byC. A purchased two chocolate bars from C, and gave one toB. Unknown to A, B, or C the chocolate bar which A gave to B contained a piece of metal that had fallen into the chocolate mix when the candy bar was made. When B attempted to eat the chocolate, she damaged one of her teeth. She was obliged to have the tooth repaired by a dentist, and in addition, lost a day's work because of the painful injury to her mouth. Her total loss amounted to $300.00. A may take legal action against C, since C sold the chocolate bar.

Dave and Ray are teammates on their city's rugby team. Ray was injured early in the season and is unable to play for the remainder of the year. Dave forgot his mouthguard on the day of a game and borrowed Ray's mouthguard which, although it was medically formed for Ray's mouth, fit Dave fairly well. During a game Dave received a high tackle and lost several of his teeth. His attempt to sue Ray as well as the mouthguard manufacturer will be successful.

Which of the following is a NOT a defence to negligence?

A seventy-year-old woman, using the escalator at the airport, dropped a glove. When she attempted to pick it up, she lost her balance and fell. As a result of the accident, she suffered a fractured arm. In an action by her against the company that had the responsibility of maintaining the escalator, the defendant company would argue which of the following for its best defence?

Sam had a swimming pool in the rear yard of his suburban home. The pool was enclosed on all sides by a 1.2-metre high wire fence, and entry to the pool area was by a gate, which Sam occasionally locked. One day, Sam drained the pool in order to have some repair work done, and accidentally left the gate closed but unlocked. A small four-year-old child who lived in the next house to Sam entered the pool area by climbing over the fence, and was injured when he fell into the empty pool Sam is liable for the injury to the child, because he failed to erect a fence that would prevent the child from entering the pool area.

A and B entered a variety store owned byC. A purchased two chocolate bars from C, and gave one toB. Unknown to A, B, or C the chocolate bar which A gave to B contained a piece of metal that had fallen into the chocolate mix when the candy bar was made. When B attempted to eat the chocolate, she damaged one of her teeth. She was obliged to have the tooth repaired by a dentist, and in addition, lost a day's work because of the painful injury to her mouth. Her total loss amounted to $300.00. B was careless in eating the chocolate bar, and therefore was responsible for her own injury.

Jacques captured a large rattlesnake while on a camping trip, and brought it home to his apartment in the city. He kept the snake in a glass aquarium which he had covered with a wire screen. One day, after feeding the snake, he accidentally failed to fasten down the screen cover, and the snake escaped from the aquarium. The snake managed to enter the adjoining apartment by way of an open balcony door. The occupant of the adjoining apartment was bitten and seriously injured when she accidentally stepped on the snake. Historically, the courts have imposed strict liability for loss on persons that keep dangerous things on their property. The rattlesnake would probably be classed in such a way by the court.

Four of the five following elements, when proved against a defendant, would constitute a successful action in negligence. Which one of the five would not?

After winning a lottery, Janice consulted Len, a stockbroker and accountant, about how to invest the huge sum she had won. In their discussion she mentioned that her brother, Steve, would probably ask her for the information and advice she received from Len. "Even though he won as much as I did," she said, "he's too cheap to pay for the help we both know we need, so I better make some notes." Among other things, Len advised Janice to buy shares in a company just before it bought heavily into retail stores in the U.S.A. and became overextended. Janice didn't act on that piece of advice, but Steve did. a. Discuss whether Steve can bring a suit against Len. b. If he can bring a suit, is he likely to succeed?

Where a negligence harms a business (for example, a factory set on fire), Common Law courts award damages to replace it, but have been reluctant to go further and award damages for economic losses (for example, lost profits from downtime). How do Quebec courts differ in their treatment of negligence?