Law of Tort
A tort refers to an omission or an act, instead of a breach of contract that causes harm or injury to another person, and the result is a civil wrong whereby the courts have to impose liability. In the court, the plaintiff will be the one who takes the case or sues the other party while the defendant is the one who is being sued. In paragraph a, the tort is that Rosie failed to meet Coco within the stipulated time as agreed, and Coco became impatient, thus prompting her to get out of the car and confirm her groceries. In the process, Coco tripped over and fell, and banged her head on a table, causing mild concussions. If the tort led to a lawsuit, Coco would be the plaintiff, while Shopping Bag would be the defendant.
The tort identified in paragraph b is the line-up of many cars in the neighbourhood that caused a lot of danger to the children because they could not play in their front yards. Neighbours had difficulty driving in and out of their compounds, and the noise from the many cars made it hard for the neighbours to attend zoom meetings from their homes. If the tort led to a lawsuit, the plaintiff would be the neighbours while the defendant would be Shopping Bag.
In paragraph c, the tort identified is that Carly left her work without any notice, therefore inconveniencing her employer, the drug store. In case of a lawsuit, the plaintiff would be the drug store while the defendant is Carly.
In paragraph d, the tort is that Maisy left steaks in a warm garage instead of putting it in a fridge and the result was that the meat got contaminated. Oscar’s family became ill for many days, and the felt weak because of consuming the meat. In case of a lawsuit, the plaintiff is the entire Oscar’s family while the defendant is Shopping Bag.
In paragraph e, the tort committed is the actions of Bob, when he hit Wayne for cutting into the line. In case of any lawsuit, the plaintiff would be Wayne while the defendant would be Bob.
The tort in paragraph f is the fake burgers that the online distributor sold to Rosie. The plaintiff would be Shopping Bag while the defendant would be the online distributor.
Question 2
The most common tort case is negligence. It happens when the person responsible for the wrong becomes careless and responsible for the harm that his carelessness caused to the other person. An example of the tort of negligence in the case study is when Rosie’s sister put the meat in the warm garage instead of putting it in the fridge. The elements of negligence are duty, breach, causation, and harm. In this case, duty is the obligation to do something, which will harm someone, like Rosie’s sister, put the meat in the warm garage instead of the fridge. The defendant had a duty of care to ensure that the meat was in the right temperature before giving it to the plaintiff. Therefore, the plaintiff must prove that there was a breach of the duty of care, which caused the family of the plaintiff to be ill. Causation is the third element. If the defendant did not breach the duty of care, the plaintiff would be in their excellent state of health. The last element is harm, which in this case is the medical cost that the family had to incur because of the negligence of the defendant.
The damage that the plaintiff is likely to claim is in terms of money. The defendant will pay up for the medical expenses that the plaintiff had to incur.
Question 3
Vicarious liability refers to a situation whereby one party is partly held responsible for the actions of the third party that led to a lawsuit. The third-party also has its share of the liability. In this case, study, what happened between Bob and Wayne can amount to vicarious liability in the sense that the third party is Shopping Bag. The reason is that Shopping Bag kept the clients waiting for a long time, and therefore caused them to be impatient; that is why Wayne had to cut into the line.
Question 4
Contributory negligence is when an injured party failed to act prudently, therefore become contributory factors in their injuries. In this case study, contributory negligence is apparent in the case of Coco. She was instructed to stay in the car and wait until the groceries were delivered to her, but she failed to comply. Therefore, she also contributed to the negligence by leaving her car and going to the garage.
Part 2
Recommendations
- All customers to be contacted when their orders are ready so that they do not have to wait for long hours. This will minimize risks, particularly for impatient customers, waiting to be served.
- Customers should be served promptly to pave the way for the next customer, and the duration of their service should be considerate because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Customers do not have to be many at any given time. The importance of this recommendation is that Shopping Bad will ensure that customers observe social distancing.
- All the customers and the staff should always have their masks on. It helps reduce risk on Covid-19 and paints the business as one that has the interest of its customers at heart.
- Shopping Bag should find a better way of making deliveries to its customers to avoid the risks of being sued by the neighbours all the time, and the incident that happened between Bob and Wayne This will bring about a peaceful co-existence between the business and the company.
- Shooing bag should consider employing more staff as this will help to create more convenience.