Question 1

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 would be liable for the injury suffered by A when A slipped on the sidewalk in front of his shop,because he should have foreseen the possibility of injury to customers when he failed to remove the ice.

Accepted Answer

B had a responsibility to keep the sidewalk in front of his shop safe for customers to walk on, and failing to remove the ice was a breach of that responsibility. As a result, he can be held liable for any injuries that are a foreseeable consequence of that breach, such as A's ankle injury.

Question 2

As a result of an explosion while plugging the Wonder "C" Model widget into an electrical socket,Tina was left in a coma for nine years.When she regained consciousness,she wished to bring legal action against the manufacturer,ACME Widget Co.,for her injuries.She did not remember much about the events that surrounded the explosion.While doing some research for her case she discovered that there had been an electrical storm on the evening she was using the Wonder "C" when it exploded.Which of the following legal principles would the manufacturer of the widget not be entitled to use?

Accepted Answer

The manufacturer cannot use the principle of res ipsa loquitur because Tina's injuries were not the result of an obvious or apparent cause, but rather a result of a specific incident or circumstance (the electrical storm).

Question 3

Jean and Donald hired a lawn care company to come to their house and spray for dandelions,which had overtaken their lawn.When the spraying was completed the chemical had not only killed the dandelions,but had destroyed the grass to an irreversible state.When the company investigated,it found that the acid content of the soil had caused the reaction.The company stated that the reaction is so rare it seldom does preliminary acid tests and tried to downplay the situation.Jean and Donald are contemplating legal action.

Accepted Answer

The lawn care company had a duty of care to exercise reasonable caution before applying the chemical to the lawn. As the company did not properly test the soil and assess the potential for a negative reaction, it breached its duty of care and is liable for the damages suffered by Jean and Donald.

Question 4

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.

Accepted Answer

B's liability would typically extend to the initial injury caused by the fall on the icy sidewalk, not the subsequent unrelated accident involving the taxi, as the latter is considered an intervening cause not reasonably foreseeable by B.

Question 5

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.Since Miss Haversham is not able to prove how she was injured by Giardia's but only that she was injured,presumably by them,which of the following concepts could she use to help her establish Giardia's negligence?

Accepted Answer

The best concept that Miss Haversham could use to help her establish Giardia's negligence is the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur. This legal doctrine means "the thing speaks for itself" and it allows a plaintiff to establish a defendant's negligence by showing that the incident would not have occurred unless the defendant was negligent. In this case, if only the guests who ate the crab salad appetizer became ill, it suggests that the crab salad was contaminated and that Giardia's was negligent in serving it.

Question 6

Richard drank all the beer at the house one evening,and knowing he was not in a fit state to drive,decided to walk down the highway to the beer store for more.In order not to get lost,he followed the centre line on the road.Milton,who was driving too fast for his headlights on low beam,hit Richard from behind,and seriously injured him.

Accepted Answer

The answer of Richard drank all the beer at the...

Question 7

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?

Accepted Answer

The answer of Where a negligence harms a business (for...

Question 8

Dennis is the owner of a successful real estate company.His agents are provided with automobiles so they can complete deals more efficiently.One of Dennis' employees takes poor care of his car and frequently produces mechanic's bills for repairs.The last bill indicated that the car was no longer mechanically safe for the road.The employee,when confronted by Dennis with the threat of legal action if he did not repay the excessive maintenance costs for the car,was uncooperative.Shortly thereafter the car,which was occupied by the employee driver and a prospective buyer,skidded out of control seriously injuring the client and destroying the vehicle.With Dennis facing legal action by the client,the employee showed no remorse,refused to compensate for any damages and again dismissed Dennis' threats of legal action.

Accepted Answer

The answer of Dennis is the owner of a successful...

Question 9

Mr.Ma operated a dry cleaning plant.Even if there was no harm or any intention of harming anyone,he could still be sued for the mere fact that dry cleaning chemicals escaped from his property.No damages resulted.If the plaintiff were successful what kind of damages would the court most likely award?

Accepted Answer

Nominal damages are awarded when there is a legal injury but no actual financial loss or damages. Since no damages resulted from the escape of chemicals, the only possible award would be nominal damages.

Question 10

The Central Hospital,Dr.Cuttham,a surgeon,and the operating room staff are sued by Mrs.Mullen because a scalpel was left in her abdomen after an operation for a burst appendix.It is unclear how the scalpel was missed.
i.The hospital will be liable if the operating room staff employed by it is found to have been negligent.
ii.Mrs.Mullen must prove on the balance of probabilities that the defendants had the sole care and control of the operating room.
iii.Mrs.Mullen must prove on the balance of probabilities that,unless someone has been negligent,scalpels are not left in abdomens after operations.
iv.Mrs.Mullen must prove on the balance of probabilities that a reasonable surgeon has a duty of care to ensure that no foreign objects are left inside a patient,that Dr.Cuttham failed to do,and that she was injured because of this.
v.Dr.Cuttham will be held liable if he cannot show that he took all reasonable care and the scalpel was left by someone else.

Accepted Answer

The answer of The Central Hospital,Dr.Cuttham,a surgeon,and the operating room...

Question 11

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?

Accepted Answer

All four other elements (duty, breach of standard of care, foreseeability of damage, and proximate cause) are essential for a successful action in negligence. The duty of the defendant must be clear in the legal sense for it to be proven that they breached that duty. If the duty is unclear, then it cannot be proven that a breach occurred.

Question 12

Mr.Ma operated a dry cleaning plant.Even if there was no intention of harming anyone,he could still be sued by someone harmed by dry cleaning chemicals that escaped from his property.This is an example of what principle of tort law?

Accepted Answer

Strict liability holds a person responsible for harm caused by their actions or products, regardless of intent or negligence. In this case, Mr. Ma could be held liable for any harm caused by dry cleaning chemicals that escaped from his property, even if he had no intention of causing harm.

Question 13

Which of the following is a defence to negligence?

Accepted Answer

All of these options are defences to negligence.

- A release is a contract where one party agrees to relinquish their right to sue for liability. 
- The statute of limitations sets a time limit for a plaintiff to file a lawsuit. 
- An act of God is an unforeseeable natural occurrence that causes harm, such as a flood or earthquake. 
- A waiver is a voluntary relinquishment of a legal right.

Therefore, all of these options could be used as a defence in a negligence case.

Question 14

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

Accepted Answer

Libel is a completely different legal concept and not related to the defence of negligence. The other options are valid defences to negligence: the statute of limitations can prevent a case from being brought to court after a certain amount of time has passed, an act of God refers to an unforeseeable event that prevents someone from fulfilling their duty of care, waiver occurs when the plaintiff voluntarily assumes a risk of harm, and volenti non fit injuria refers to the concept of someone willingly participating in a risky activity and therefore cannot claim injury as a result.

Question 15

Jacqui and Penny decided to go into partnership in a small baseball equipment manufacturing firm.Jacqui raised $250,000 start-up funds,in large part on the basis of documents which she forged.These documents purported to show that they owned their factory,when in fact,they merely leased it.Jacqui spent all of the money on herself,and she now has no assets and has been jailed for 10 years.The creditors have contacted Penny and told her they will hold her liable for the loss.

Accepted Answer

As a partner, Penny is responsible for the actions of her partner, even if she was unaware of the fraudulent actions of Jacqui. This is known as vicarious liability. Therefore, Penny can be held liable for the loss incurred by the creditors.

Question 16

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

Accepted Answer

In order for Miss Haversham to successfully sue for negligence, she would have to prove that Giardia's had a duty of care, failed to meet that duty by serving food that was not fit to eat, and that this failure directly led to her illness. This includes proving causation. Choice D includes all of these elements and is the most accurate answer. Choice A is incorrect as strict liability would not apply unless the food was inherently dangerous. Choice B and E are close, but do not explicitly state that Giardia's had a duty to serve food that was fit to eat. Choice C is also close, but again does not include the necessary element of causation.

Question 17

Mr.Ma operated a dry cleaning plant.Even if there was no intention of harming anyone,he could still be sued by someone harmed by dry cleaning chemicals that escaped from his property.This is an example of what tort?

Accepted Answer

The answer of Mr.Ma operated a dry cleaning plant.Even if...

Question 18

Terri was injured by an exploding pop bottle.She lost time from work,for which she was not paid,and had to undergo several painful operations.Her right eye was badly damaged and she will lose the sight in it over the next few years.If she wins her case against the manufacturer of the pop bottle,she will be entitled to
i.an injunction.
ii.an order of replevin.
iii.nominal damages
iv.punitive damages.
v.special damages
vi.general damages.

Accepted Answer

Special damages compensate for quantifiable monetary losses like lost wages and medical expenses, while general damages compensate for non-monetary damages like pain and suffering or loss of vision.

Question 19

While at a baseball game one afternoon,Jack bought Matt a hot dog.When Matt bit into the hot dog he broke his tooth on a nail in it.
i.Jack cannot sue the hot dog vendor for breach of contract.
ii.Matt can sue the hot dog vendor for breach of contract.
iii.Jack can sue the hot dog manufacturer under the tort of manufacturer's liability
iv.Matt can sue the hot dog manufacturer under the tort of manufacturer's liability.
v.The hot dog manufacturer will be strictly liable for allowing an inherently dangerous hot dog to leave his property and injure Matt.
vi.Jack can sue for his emotional distress caused by the sight of blood coming from Matt's mouth.

Accepted Answer

Jack cannot sue for breach of contract because he was not the injured party. Matt can sue the hot dog manufacturer under the tort of manufacturer's liability because he was injured by the product.

Question 20

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?

Accepted Answer

The defendant company would argue that they were not operating the escalator below the standard of care. They could argue that they regularly maintain and inspect the escalator, and that there were no issues with the escalator at the time of the accident. This would be their best defense against the plaintiff's claim of negligence.

Quiz 5: Negligence and Unintentional Torts

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?