Deck 3: Introduction to Torts

Question 1

Which of the following torts fall within the category of intentional torts?

A) Rylands v Fletcher, control of wild animals, and intimidation
B) false imprisonment, trespass to land, and interference with chattels
C) battery, false imprisonment, and nuisance
D) interference with chattels, professional negligence, and product liability
E) trespass to land, conspiracy, and product liability

Answer 1

B

Question 2

Which of the following statements is TRUE with respect to the concept of a blood feud?

A) The concept refers to the fact that many rules in tort developed as a result of the historical tension between Parliament and the courts in England.
B) The concept allowed the family of a murder victim to kill the murderer or someone in the murderer's family.
C) The concept referred to the fact that the common law traditionally executed tortfeasors.
D) The concept of a blood feud traditionally applied only if a tortfeasor attacked a close relative.
E) The concept is more closely tied to contracts than to torts.

Answer 2

B

Question 3

Which of the following statements is TRUE?

A) Nominal damages are generally only available for the tort of negligence.
B) Nominal damages are always awarded in addition to compensatory damages.
C) The phrase "nominal damages" refers to any type of damages that have a name.
D) Nominal damages are generally only available for torts that are actionable per se.
E) Nominal damages are intended to punish the tortfeasor.

Answer 3

D

Question 4

Which of the following statements is TRUE with respect to the comparison between a tort and a contract?

A) Both a tort and a contract always involve the breach of a civil obligation that gives rise to an award of damages.
B) If the same events involve both a tort and a breach of contract, the plaintiff generally is entitled to collect damages for both.
C) Although the same set of facts may support both a claim for tort and a claim for breach of contract, the plaintiff cannot sue for both at the same time.
D) Damages look backward in contract, but forward in tort.
E) From a risk management perspective, tort obligations are often more dangerous than contractual obligations because tort obligations generally are not voluntarily created.

Question 5

Rawls Inc sued Nozick Ltd in tort. The court awarded nominal damages. That means that

A) Nozick must have committed an equitable wrong rather than a legal wrong.
B) the court calculated the amount of damages for the primary purpose of deterrence.
C) Nozick must have committed the tort of defamation.
D) Rawls did not prove that it suffered a loss as a result of Nozick's tort.
E) Nozick must have committed the tort of negligence.

Question 6

Paine Enterprises sued Montesquieu Corp in tort. The court held that there had been a failure to mitigate damages. That means that

A) the loss that Paine suffered was not a reasonably foreseeable loss of Montesquieu's tort.
B) Paine may still be entitled to damages for losses that could not have been mitigated.
C) Paine committed a tort that wiped out the effect of Montesquieu's tort.
D) the tort that Montesquieu committed was not an intentional tort.
E) Paine started its lawsuit against Montesquieu too late.

Question 7

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 do some independent research into the relevant law before she gives her decision. Which of the following statements is TRUE?

A) Beverley will have to examine the rules pertaining to strict liability torts if the case before her deals with a conspiracy.
B) Beverley will need to examine the rules pertaining to intentional torts if the case before her deals with product liability.
C) Beverley is entitled to impose liability only if she is satisfied that the defendant breached an obligation, even if the case deals with a strict liability tort.
D) Every type of intentional tort requires proof that the defendant intended to cause the plaintiff to suffer an injury.
E) Beverley will need to examine the law of defences if the case before her deals with an intentional tort but not if it deals with a strict liability tort.

Question 8

Which of the following statements is TRUE?

A) Punitive damages serve the same basic purpose as nominal damages.
B) Punitive damages are only available for unintentional torts.
C) Punitive damages may be awarded even if the defendant is not guilty of a crime.
D) Punitive damages cannot be awarded in addition to compensatory damages.
E) Punitive damages are only available for intentional torts.

Question 9

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

A) a crime, a tort, and a breach of contract.
B) a tort and a breach of contract, but not a crime.
C) a breach of contract, but neither a tort nor a crime.
D) a crime and a tort, but not a breach of contract.
E) a crime and a breach of contract, but not a tort.

Question 10

Bentham Inc sued Locke Ltd in tort. The judge denied liability on the grounds of remoteness. That means that

A) Bentham waited too long before starting its lawsuit against Locke.
B) the tort that Locke committed was not an intentional tort.
C) Locke's tort did not in fact cause Bentham's loss.
D) the tort occurred outside of Canada.
E) the tort must have been committed by a person who worked for Locke as an independent contractor.

Question 11

Christine entered into a contract with Vernon. She was required to pay $5000 and he was to provide advice regarding a business venture that she was pursuing. If Vernon had performed properly, Christine would have earned a profit of $20 000. As a result of Vernon's careless performance, however, Christine suffered a loss of $10 000 (in addition to the $5000 that she had paid to Vernon). Christine wants to sue Vernon in both contract and tort. Which of the following statements is TRUE?

A) Christine will receive damages of $5000 if her claim in tort is successful.
B) s the terms were explained in the text, Vernon owed a primary obligation to Christine in both tort and contract.
C) As the terms were explained in the text, Vernon owed a primary obligation in contract and a secondary obligation in tort, at the moment before her acted carelessly.
D) Christine will receive damages of $20 000 if her claim in tort is successful.
E) Christine must choose between tort and contract, and cannot sue for both at the same time.

Question 12

Jose has sued Sharona in tort as a result of an injury that he suffered while visiting her property. Given the facts of the case, it is possible, at least in theory, for Jose to prove a number of different torts. Which of the following statements is TRUE?

A) If Jose sues for a negligence tort, he must prove that Sharona deliberately neglected to protect him from harm.
B) If Jose sues for an intentional tort, he must prove that Sharona intended to hurt him.
C) because the traditional category of torts was developed in both the courts of law and the courts of chancery, that category is generally said to include both legal and equitable wrongs
D) Jose is entitled to sue for a number of different torts at the same time and he is not required to sue for one particular that he believes will lead to the best result.
E) While the common law traditionally recognized a few strict liability torts, those torts frequently created unfair results, and consequently they have now been abolished in Canada.

Question 13

Max worked in a warehouse owned by Fortress Storage Inc. His job consisted mainly of moving and storing expensive and sensitive pieces of computer equipment that Fortress had received from its customers. Unfortunately, while Max normally was among the company's most trusted workers, he carelessly dropped a computer that belonged to HAL Inc and that HAL had asked Fortress to store. Which of the following statements is TRUE?

A) The court may apply the doctrine of vicarious liability only if Fortress has liability insurance.
B) Max may be vicariously liable for Fortress's tort even if HAL's equipment was damaged while Max was doing something that Fortress had told him not to do.
C) If Fortress is held vicariously liable, then HAL will be prevented from suing Max.
D) As a matter of risk management, Max and Fortress both should have purchased liability insurance.
E) Fortress may be vicariously liable only if a court decides that Max is not liable.

Question 14

Brian takes great pride in being obnoxious. One of his favourite ploys is to talk loudly on his cell phone during movies. Unfortunately for him, few people see the humour in his behaviour, and some become positively hostile. Brian learned that lesson several months ago during a late night show at the Bijou Theatre. After he rudely refused to quiet down, Brian was asked by Myriam, the theatre's night manager, to leave the premises. Brian loudly refused that request as well. Myriam then announced that she was going to the lobby to call the police to escort Brian off the premises. The moment she left the room, however, another customer named Ivan jumped Brian from behind, knocked him senseless with a single, vicious blow to the back of his head, and dragged his limp body out the exit and into the alley behind the theatre. Which of the following statements is most likely TRUE?

A) because Ivan, by removing Brian from the premises, was performing the type of act that is normally performed by an employee, the theatre may be vicariously liable for any torts that Ivan may have committed
B) Ivan may be liable for punitive damages even if he is not convicted of any crime.
C) Given the violent nature of Ivan's attack on Brian, a court almost certainly would apply a strict liability tort.
D) As long as Ivan and Brian both contribute to a workers' compensation scheme, Brian will be entitled to compensation from that scheme.
E) If Ivan's actions constitute a crime, then he will be held liable to Brian for compensatory damages only if there is proof beyond a reasonable doubt that Ivan also committed a tort.

Question 15

Faye is a wildlife expert who works for a major zoo. Because her love of animals does not end when she leaves work each night, she has a number of exotic pets in her home, including a small capuchin monkey that she calls Kong. Unfortunately, although Kong had no history of violent behaviour, he viciously attacked a door- to- door canvasser named Ray who rang Faye's doorbell one evening. Which of the following statements is TRUE?

A) Faye cannot be held liable unless the court is satisfied that she either carelessly controlled Kong or intentionally caused Kong to attack Ray.
B) Under the traditional common law rules, Faye cannot be held liable because Kong had not previously bitten anyone.
C) Even if she would otherwise be held strictly liable for Ray's injuries, Faye may escape liability by proving that before ringing her doorbell, Ray had seen a sign that clearly warned of the danger of wild animals and directed strangers not to approach the house.
D) Liability for wild animals is a type of intentional tort.
E) because the common law imposes absolute liability on anyone who has control of a wild animal, Faye will be held liable for Ray's injuries and there no defences that are available to her

Question 16

Werner owns a number of animals that live in and around his home. Because Werner's house is located in a secluded area, he has little interaction with people outside of his immediate family. He consequently had never received any complaints about his animals until recently. That complaint has come in the form of a tort action by Madonna, who claims that she was wrongfully hurt by one of Werner's animals. The evidence establishes that she was bitten by the animal as she knocked on Werner's door with the intention of asking him to donate to a charity. Which of the following statements is TRUE?

A) Under the traditional common law rules, Werner may be relieved of liability if the animal that bit Madonna was a pet dog who had never before bitten anyone.
B) Under the traditional common law rules, the owner of an animal may be held liable for any damage caused by the animal only if that owner intentionally or carelessly created the situation that resulted in the damage.
C) There are no defences to a strict liability tort.
D) Under the traditional common law rules, if the animal that bit Madonna was a wild wolverine, Werner could be held liable only if he knew that the animal was dangerous.
E) Strict liability is a type of vicarious liability.

Question 17

Abdul worked for Primus Finance Co. Following a series of disastrous losses, several of the company's customers have sued Abdul in tort. Because Abdul has relatively little money, however, those customers also want to sue Primus Finance. Primus Finance denies vicarious liability by arguing that Abdul was an independent contractor rather than an employee. A court is more likely to decide that Abdul was an independent contractor if

A) Abdul was paid a consistent amount by Primus Finance every two weeks.
B) in order to perform his work, Abdul used an office and computer system that belonged to Primus Finance.
C) the customers who are suing protected themselves against losses through insurance policies.
D) Abdul decided for himself when, where, and how he would provide services to Primus Finance.
E) Abdul committed his torts against the company's clients deliberately, rather than carelessly.

Question 18

As a result of dumping toxic materials into the water supply, Acme Corp has been held liable under the tort of nuisance to several of its neighbours. While the company's directors are concerned about the bad publicity, they do take comfort in the fact that Acme holds a liability insurance policy that applies in this situation. Which of the following statements is TRUE?

A) The doctrine of the duty to defend requires Acme to defend itself against its neighbour's claims in order to protect the insurance company from having to pay any money.
B) A duty to defend exists under the insurance policy only if the directors are not liable for the nuisance.
C) The insurance policy would have required the insurance company to pay for the costs associated with the lawsuits that were brought against the company.
D) Because of the insurance policy, the deterrent effect of the court's judgment will be lessened.
E) Because of the insurance policy, Acme's neighbours are entitled to be paid twice, once by Acme and again by the insurance company.

Question 19

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?

A) Terry may be held liable in tort even if he has already been convicted of a crime as a result of his use of Julia's computer.
B) Julia is entitled to an injunction that would force Terry to pay for the monetary value of his use of her computer.
C) because he breached the secondary obligation that he owed to Julia, Terry is now subject to a primary obligation to provide her with compensatory damages
D) Julia is entitled to either sue Terry for damages in tort or prosecute him of a crime.
E) Terry cannot be held liable in tort if he already has been convicted of a crime as a result of his use of Julia's computer.

Question 20

During an argument, Sylvia flew into a rage and hit her friend Ian in the head with a baseball bat. Which of the following statements is TRUE?

A) Sylvia breached a civil obligation that she owed to society as a whole.
B) Sylvia probably has committed both a tort and a crime.
C) In the normal course of events, Ian could prosecute Sylvia for her crime.
D) If a court decides that Sylvia has violated a public obligation, it will probably award damages against her.
E) Sylvia breached a public obligation that she owed to Ian personally.

Question 21

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?

A) BLA must compensate Steven if he suffered any property damage as a result of his own trespass.
B) If Rundeep is awarded an injunction, rather than damages, Steven's insurance policy will be of no benefit to him because the court's order will not require him to pay any money to Rundeep.
C) BLA probably has a duty to defend that requires it to pay Steven's legal expenses.
D) If BLA pays damages on Steven's behalf, tort law's compensatory and deterrence functions will be equally served.
E) BLA's duty to defend is an obligation that it owes to Rundeep.

Question 22

Which of the following statements is TRUE?

A) The word "tort" is derived from the Greek word for "obligation" or "duty."
B) Punitive damages cannot be awarded at the same time as compensatory damages.
C) Studies prove that tort law has a very effective deterrent function.
D) Nominal damages are generally restricted to torts that are actionable per se.
E) Security guards and police officers have the same authority to detain people suspected of committing crimes.

Question 23

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

A) $400 000 in contract.
B) $400 000 in tort.
C) $600 000 in tort.
D) $600 000 in contract.
E) $1 000 000 in tort.

Question 24

Omega Inc purchased a liability insurance policy from WorldWide Insurance Ltd. Which of the following statements may be TRUE?

A) The insurance policy may protect World Wide from liability in tort.
B) A liability insurance policy is important only if and when a person is held liable by a court.
C) Despite issuing the liability insurance policy, WorldWide may not be required to pay damages on behalf of Omega if Omega acted in a way that was not only tortious, but also deliberate and intentional.
D) The insurance policy will protect Omega only if Omega has a contract with at least one other party.
E) Omega probably purchased liability insurance because it was worried that it might not be able to collect full damages if it was hurt by a tortfeasor.

Question 25

Which of the following statements is TRUE with respect to the relationship between tort and contract?

A) A plaintiff who is entitled, on the basis of the same set of facts, to sue in both tort and contract should always sue in contract because contractual damages are always worth at least as much as tort damages.
B) A plaintiff who is entitled, on the basis of the same set of facts, to sue in both tort and contract should always sue in tort because tort damages are always worth at least as much as contractual damages.
C) The obligation to behave in a certain way is considered primary in contract and secondary in tort because contract is a more important area of law.
D) Damages look backwards in contract but forwards in tort.
E) The concept of privity is important in contract but not in torts.

Question 26

Which of the following statements is TRUE with respect to the doctrine of vicarious liability?

A) Because personal liability and vicarious liability are separate concepts, a successful plaintiff usually is entitled to collect full damages from both the employee and the employer.
B) While vicarious liability provides employers with more incentive to act carefully when selecting, training, and supervising employees, it also tends to provide employees with less incentive to act carefully as they perform their jobs.
C) Vicarious liability serves tort law's compensatory function by increasing the possibility that the tortfeasor will receive damages from someone.
D) As a general rule, an employee who has paid damages for a tort that he or she personally committed is entitled to use the doctrine of vicarious liability to recover that same amount of money from his or her employer.
E) A person who is injured by a tort that was committed by an employer personally can use the doctrine of vicarious liability to sue any of the employer's employees.

Question 27

Jojo suffered a catastrophic injury while she was at work. Although she strongly suspects that the accident that injured her was caused by the carelessness of one of her co- workers, she cannot prove that fact. She therefore hopes to receive compensation for her loss from a workers' compensation scheme. Which of the following statements is TRUE?

A) If Jojo is entitled to receive workers' compensation, she will receive compensation for her loss directly from her employer.
B) Jojo cannot receive workers' compensation unless she can prove who caused the accident that resulted in her injury.
C) Jojo is not entitled to workers' compensation unless she voluntarily contributed money toward the workers' compensation fund.
D) Workers' compensation schemes operate in less than half of Canada's provinces.
E) If Jojo receives workers' compensation, she will likely be entitled to receive less than she would have been entitled to received if she had been able to prove that her injury was caused by a tort.

Question 28

Which of the following statements is TRUE?

A) A person may be subject to an obligation in tort law even if they did not agree to that situation.
B) The concept of privity is part of every tort.
C) The victim of a tort is called a tortfeasor.
D) Liability in tort law always requires proof of deliberate or careless wrongdoing.
E) In exceptional circumstances, a person may be imprisoned for committing a tort.

Question 29

Which of the following torts fall within the category of strict liability torts?

A) Rylands v Fletcher, deceit, and false imprisonment
B) deceit, battery, and trespass to land
C) control of wild animals, Rylands v Fletcher, and arguably vicarious liability
D) nuisance, battery, and negligence
E) negligence, nuisance, and occupiers' liability

Question 30

You have been hired by a law reform commission to examine ways in which tort law can be used to affect behaviour. As part of that project, you have been asked to consider the level of mental culpability that the plaintiff is required to prove before the defendant can be held liable by a court. Which of the following statements is TRUE with respect to tort law as it currently exists in Canada?

A) An intentional torts occurs only if the defendant intended to cause the plaintiff to suffer a loss.
B) Strict liability allows people to engage in unusually hazardous activities, but also requires them to pay for any damage that occurs, even if they took every reasonable precaution.
C) Because of the need to discourage tortious behaviour, negligence forms the smallest category of tort.
D) The concept of strict liability always applies if a person intentionally causes another person to suffer an injury.
E) An intentional torts occurs only if the defendant intended to breach an obligation.

Question 31

Makayla successfully sued Deacon for the tort of defamation. In that situation, the term tortfeasor refers to

A) Deacon as the person who committed the tort.
B) Makayla as the person who suffered, or felt, the tort.
C) the fact that Makayla's tort caused Deacon to fear that he would suffer an injury.
D) the court as a representative of society's concern, or fear, or anti- social behaviour.
E) the traditional idea, or theory, of tort law.

Question 32

Elise owns and operates a convenience store. Because that store is located near a high school, it loses a great deal of profit to shoplifting. Last week, Elise caught Hakan in the act of stealing a magazine. She physically detained him and called the police. The police arrived and placed Hakan in handcuffs. At that point, Elise calmly and intentionally punched Hakan in the face and said, "I've been waiting a long time for the chance to do that." Elise has a liability insurance policy that she purchased from the Pacific All Risk Insurance Co. Which of the following statements is TRUE?

A) If Elise is found liable for the tort of battery, she will probably have to pay the damages herself.
B) If Elise is found liable for the tort of battery, the police department will also be held vicariously liable for the same tort.
C) Because Elise was acting on behalf of her store, a court could impose liability upon the store, but not upon Elise.
D) Elise almost certainly committed the tort of false imprisonment.
E) PARI will probably be required to pay damages on Elise's behalf with respect to Hakan's claim for false imprisonment.

Question 33

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?

A) Caesar will probably receive an injunction.
B) Because she committed an intentional tort, Marie cannot avoid liability on the basis of the general doctrine of remoteness.
C) The rules of remoteness are important only if the court awards punitive damages.
D) An injury is never considered to be too remote if it was a direct consequence of a tort.
E) The doctrine of remoteness is based on the court's desire to award compensatory damages in every case.

Question 34

Gold Star Investment Inc is in the business of providing financial advice to clients. Alan, who is the company's managing director, hires all of the company's staff. Unfortunately, he tends to hire not on the basis of formal qualifications, but rather on the basis of physical beauty. Consequently, among Gold Star's staff are Brad and Angie, a pair of exceptionally attractive, but dull- witted, financial advisors. When Jennifer retained Gold Star to provide investment advice, her file was assigned to Brad and Angie. Through sheer incompetence, the pair managed to lose virtually all of Jennifer's money on bad investments within a very short time. If Gold Star is held vicariously liable

A) it will have to pay damages to Jennifer only if Brad and Angie cannot afford to do so.
B) it may also be held personally liable to Jennifer if the court finds that the company committed a tort against her.
C) Jennifer will not be entitled to sue Brad and Angie.
D) it must hold a liability insurance policy.
E) Gold Star will have to compensate Brad and Angie if Jennifer collects damages from those two individuals.

Question 35

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

A) sexual abuse may involve a crime, but it never creates liability in tort.
B) it is now clear that an insurance company may, depending upon the wording of a liability insurance policy, deny coverage if the insured party intentionally committed a tort.
C) the plaintiff in the case was more likely to receive compensation.
D) liability insurance always defeats tort law's deterrence function.
E) liability insurance is never available if a tort is committed against a child.

Question 36

Ethical Perspective 3.1 discussed the Supreme Court of Canada's decision in Bazley v Curry. Which of the following statements is TRUE?

A) The court held that an employer may be held vicariously liable for the torts of an independent contractor.
B) The court's decision focused on the concept of liability insurance.
C) The court held that an employer may be held vicariously liable for an employee's tort even if that employee committed a tort by doing something that the employer expressly prohibited the employee from doing.
D) The court held that an employer will be held vicariously liable for an employee's tort only if the employee committed a tort by doing something that the employer had directed the employee to do.
E) The court held that an insurance company may deny coverage if an insured party committed a tort that also amounted to a deliberate and criminal act.

Question 37

Which of the following statements is TRUE with respect to alternative compensation schemes?

A) Workers' compensation schemes usually prevent the victim of a workplace accident from suing in tort.
B) Most workers' compensation schemes are funded by voluntary donations from employees.
C) No- fault automobile accident schemes only apply to accidents that were not the fault of either party.
D) No- fault automobile accident schemes always prevent the victim of a traffic accident from suing in tort.
E) Most alternative compensation schemes are funded by a tax that is imposed on damages that are awarded in tort cases.

Question 38

Gawain and Julie are neighbours. Gawain committed the tort of trespass to land by smashing a window in Julie's attic with a baseball bat. Julie could have quickly and easily fixed that damage by paying a home repair company $1000. Instead, she did nothing for eight months. At the end of that period, a thunderstorm caused rain to pour into Julie's attic through the broken window. Julie then paid a home repair company $4000 to fix both the broken window and the damage caused to the attic by the rain. Which of the following statements is TRUE?

A) A court would probably impose an injunction to require Gawain to fix the damage to Julie's house himself.
B) The doctrine of mitigation is used to deter the commission of torts.
C) A court would probably award Julie compensatory damages of $1000.
D) A court would probably award Julie compensatory damages of $4000.
E) The doctrine of mitigation would not apply because Gawain committed an intentional tort.

Question 39

Miriam worked as a financial advisor with Acme Investments Inc. Over the period of several years, she stole millions of dollars from the company's clients. She did so by means of a complex and carefully planned series of fraudulent transfers. The company had no reason to believe that anything was wrong until the police arrived one day and explained the entire situation to Acme's president. Which of the following statements is TRUE?

A) If Miriam holds a liability insurance policy, she will be protected from liability, even though she deliberately defrauded the company's customers, as long as she is sued for a tort rather than prosecuted for a crime.
B) While Acme may have liability insurance against personal liability, it cannot have liability insurance against vicarious liability.
C) If the company's clients sue Miriam in tort law, she may be punished by a term in prison.
D) Acme may be held vicariously liable even though it had no reason to believe that Miriam was acting improperly.
E) The doctrine of vicarious liability means that Acme has a duty to defend Miriam if she is sued in tort.

Question 40

The Kingston Maroons Corp (usually known simply as the Maroons) owns and operates both a hockey team by that name and the Kingston Arena. The Maroons employ Gilbert Douglas, who is the team's star player. During a recent game, Douglas was sent to the penalty box by the referee. Unhappy with the referee's decision, Douglas slammed the penalty box door shut. That caused the protective glass attached to the penalty box to shatter. Cherie, a fan who was sitting nearby, was cut by the broken glass. The evidence indicates that the accident was caused partly by Douglas's carelessness in slamming the penalty box door shut, and partly by the fact that the Maroons organization had carelessly installed the protective glass. Both Douglas and the Maroons therefore committed the tort of negligence. Which of the following statements is probably TRUE?

A) Douglas is relieved of personal liability if the Kingston Maroons Corp is held vicariously liable.
B) If Douglas is an employee of the Kingston Maroons, then he must be an independent contractor as well.
C) Douglas is not personally liable to Cherie in tort because her case falls within the workers' compensation scheme.
D) The Kingston Maroons Corp is personally liable to Cherie only if Douglas is classified as an independent contractor.
E) The Kingston Maroons Corp is vicariously liable only if Douglas is personally liable.

Question 41

Lupine Inc successfully sued Wolf Finance Ltd in both tort and contract. In this situation, it is accurate to say that Wolf Finance owed obligations to Lupine, one that arose by operation of law and the other that arose through voluntary agreement.

Question 42

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.

Question 43

The provincial government has become very concerned about the number of torts that occur each year that result in personal injuries. Aside from the human misery that they cause, those accidents cost society a great deal of money. A tort victim cannot be a productive member of the work force while they are recuperating at home or in hospital. The provincial government consequently has asked you to prepare a report on how the rules in tort law might be reformed to more effectively deter tortious behaviour. Your report should include a discussion of (a) the availability of liability insurance, and (b) the rules of vicarious liability. You have also been asked to consider whether it is always desirable to deter activities that may result in tortious losses.

Question 44

Explain, from a risk management perspective, why liability insurance may be more important with respect to liability in tort than with respect to liability for breach of contract.

Question 45

According to one old English case, Ethelred was entitled under the doctrine of blood feud to kill Halebert. If the same facts arose today, the Canadian legal system would deal with the situation through a combination of tort law and contract law.

Question 46

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.

Question 47

Robert successfully sued Marjorie in tort. Majorie has liability insurance. In this situation, Marjorie is considered the tortfeasor.

Question 48

A tort is considered to be actionable per se (which means "actionable in itself") only if the same facts also support a criminal prosecution.

Question 49

Miles was sued in tort. He previously purchased a liability insurance policy from Western Mutual Insurance Co. Even if the law suit against him ultimately fails, that insurance policy may be beneficial to Miles because it will require the insurance company to pay for the costs associated with the trial.

Question 50

Sidhu was injured when Melissa, a construction worker, carelessly dropped a hammer out of a window. Sidhu has successfully sued both Melissa, on the basis of her personal liability, and Melissa's employer, on the basis of the employer's vicarious liability. Sidhu must now choose between recovering all of his damages from Melissa or all of his damages from her employer.

Question 51

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.

Question 52

Although the same set of events may support both a law suit in tort and a criminal prosecution, a civil action will not succeed if a wrongdoer has already been convicted of a criminal offence.

Question 53

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.

Question 54

You may be held liable in tort even though you were unaware of the fact that you owed an obligation to the plaintiff.

Question 55

Most alternative compensation schemes apply only if an injury is the result of a wrongful act.

Question 56

Until recently, Tamara worked in a warehouse, earning $3000 a month. She was required to quit her job, however, after being injured in a skiing accident that was tortiously caused by Buck. That injury required Tamara to spend two months in the hospital. After being discharged from the hospital, Tamara was further required to complete an intensive physiotherapy program over the course of a month. At the end of that month, her physician told her that while she could not return to work in a warehouse, she should immediately take up employment in a less demanding (and lower paying) job. Nevertheless, for the next two months, Tamara chose to do nothing at all beyond watching television and listening to music. As her financial difficulties deepened, she eventually decided to re- train as a secretary. She therefore enrolled in a three- month secretarial course, for which she was required to pay a total of $3000. At the end of that course,Tamara promptly returned to workforce, this time as a secretary at a salary of $2000 per month. Exactly one year has now passed since Tamara began working as a secretary. How much is she entitled to receive from Buck by way of damages for lost income in the past?

Question 57

Eliza adores animals. Consequently, although she works in a small office, she brings a number of pets to work with her every day. She always brings Higgins, her poodle. Depending upon the circumstances, she often also brings Henry, her badger. For the most part, the animals cause no problems. Eliza is very conscientious and she takes every precaution to ensure that her animals do not cause any damage to the people and property around them. Unfortunately, as a result of a thunderstorm, both Henry and Higgins became unusually agitated one day at Eliza's office. And despite Eliza's best efforts to comfort and control them, they both bit Rex, a courier delivery person, as he entered Eliza's office. Eliza is very apologetic, but she does not believe that she should be liable for the losses that Rex suffered as a result of the attack. She did, after all, do her best to protect Rex from harm, both by training Henry and Higgins to behave gently toward strangers and by trying to calm them down during the storm. Based on the common law rules discussed in Chapter 3, would a court hold Eliza liable to Rex? If so, on what basis?

Question 58

Damages in tort look backward, whereas damages in contract look forward, primarily because the courts realize that the victim of a tort is relatively more likely to suffer a serious physical injury.

Question 59

The deterrent function of tort law is based on the belief that the high costs associated with litigation will discourage plaintiffs from starting law suits that have little chance of success.

Question 60

Suneel committed the tort of battery against Jodi. The injuries that she suffered were unexpectedly severe. Suneel can be held fully liable for Jodi's losses even if those losses were not reasonably foreseeable.

Question 61

Briefly identify and explain the manner in which tort obligations and contractual obligations generally arise. Briefly explain why tort obligations create a greater hazard for the purposes of risk management.

Question 62

Ramon cut the grass that surrounded a condominium complex owned by Acme Inc. He carelessly failed to check the ground for dangerous objects before doing so. As a result, he ran the lawnmower over a pile of rocks. One of the rocks shot out from the lawnmower and hit Irene in the eye. Irene is sure that Ramon committed the tort of negligence, but she also realizes that he has very little money. She therefore wants to claim damages from Acme Corp on the basis of the doctrine of vicarious liability. Is she entitled to do so? Do you require any additional information before answering that question? Explain your answers.

Question 63

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.

Question 64

Alpha Corp owns a large plot of land called Blackacre. Except for one corner of that property, where Alpha's factory, offices, and warehouse are located, Blackacre is undeveloped. Omega Inc owns a piece of land that shares a common border with Blackacre. That border is located at the edge of an undeveloped section of Blackacre. Omega's property contains a number of buildings, including a manufacturing plant. That plant generates a considerable amount of waste. For the past ten months, Omega has greatly reduced its waste disposal expenses by simply dumping its waste onto Blackacre, rather than transporting the waste to a proper dumpsite. Alpha objected to the waste from the outset and initially tried to resolve the issue through friendly negotiations. It eventually became clear, however, that Omega would not voluntarily stop dumping waste onto Blackacre. Alpha consequently sued Omega for trespass to land. The court agreed with the claim and imposed liability upon Omega. The judge is now required to decide which remedy or remedies Alpha is entitled to receive. In that respect, Alpha has shown three things. (i) It will cost $75 000 to remove Omega's waste from Blackacre. (ii) Omega will dump waste onto Blackacre again in the future unless there is something to prevent it from doing so. And (iii) deliberate dumping of this sort has become a widespread problem because manufacturers, such as Omega, often believe that while the expense of properly disposing of waste material is much the same whether the work is done immediately or whether it is done only after a court has imposed liability, there is always a chance that the victim of a tort will not, for some reason, actually take the problem to court. Consequently, manufacturers often believe that there is little to lose, and potentially much to gain, by tortiously dumping waste on neighbouring properties. What remedies should be awarded against Omega on these facts?

Question 65

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 $5 000 000. 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 $5 000 000? Explain your answer.

Question 66

Bondi Shipping Corp steered its ship, The Surf, into a dock that was owned by Bradman Inc. Bondi intended to make certain repairs to The Surf. During the course of those repairs, Bondi's employees carelessly allowed a chemical, known as australite, to leak into the water surrounding the dock. The australite, which floated on the surface of the water, caught fire after sparks from a welding gun that Bondi's employees were using fell into the water and onto the australite. The flames spread quickly and Bradman's dock was entirely destroyed. The total cost of the damage is $2 000 000. The court has found that Bondi is vicariously responsible for the actions of its employees, and that those employees committed the tort of negligence when they carelessly allowed australite to leak out of The Surf and onto the water. The court also found that while it is now obvious that australite is flammable in some circumstances, no one knew (or could have known) at the time of the accident that australite is flammable. Will Bondi be held liable to Bradman for compensatory damages? Provide the best explanation for your answer.

Question 67

Explain how torts are classified according to the degree of mental culpability. Your answer should include examples of each category within that classification system.

Question 68

Celine physically attacked Roger. She therefore committed both a tort and a crime. Briefly identify and explain any important differences between court proceedings concerning the tort and court proceedings concerning the crime.

Question 69

What is an "alternative compensation scheme"? From the perspective of an injured person, what are the advantages and disadvantages of receiving relief under an alternative compensation scheme, rather than under tort law?

Question 70

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.