Business Law – Fall 2012
Instructor: Daniel R. Shear
“We have completed this assignment on our own and have not discussed it with any other individual or used any other unauthorized aids. We acknowledge compliance with the academic requirements (e.g. citation of sources) of the University of Toronto.”
Legal Issue #1 - Who should be responsible for the men with the broken wrist?
Background: On the final night of the haunt, there were two young men who ignored the sign that said "danger, upper balcony unsafe - this is NOT part of the tour" and went upstairs to use the bathroom. Due to that fact that the renovation was not done, thus, plumbing was not fully attached As a result, after they flushed…show more content… On the other hand, the man’s wrist was broke right at the time when he fell, according to the relevant time says by the law, it again assures that the responsibilities would fall on Leanne. (2) Standard of care: As we know, after the contractor told Leanne about the plumbing problems she had set up a sign to warn the visitors to stop going forward. Normally if someone sees a sign tells them not to go forward, people would follow, however, during that evening the situation is slightly different. We know that it is a haunted theatre event during Halloween week; consequently the visitors on that evening are most likely to seek challenges and excitements. Therefore, it is reasonable for some risk loving people who would deliberately ignore the sign and go upstairs to seek for more fun. As the planner and the manager of the event, she should have studied the behavior of the potential customers in order to guarantee a better performance and strategies to control the whole activity. Nonetheless, the two young men were considered to be trespasser in this case due to the fact that the haunted event didn’t invite anyone to go upstairs. As a result, the duty owed to trespasser was extremely limited, according to the Common Law Status Approach, as long as the occupier of that particular
