Mrs. Kahn arranged a trip to Europe for herself and her two children. Her husband couldn't go. She spent hours with the travel agent, Mr. Tobin, deciding on the vacation package. She asked him and wrote a note asking again what documents, shots, etc., would be needed for the trip. Tobin said and wrote that all they would need would be their passports. Tobin forgot to tell her that a new regulation required a note from the father allowing the children to leave Canada, although he had received a memo in red warning him to alert travellers of the new regulation. When Mrs. Kahn and the children reached Toronto to embark on a plane for London, they were stopped because she did not have the required note from Mr. Kahn. They lost their reservations for both the plane and the tour with no refund. On these facts, which of the following is true?

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

Mr. Tobin had a duty to inform Mrs. Kahn about the new regulation regarding the note from Mr. Kahn. His failure to do so constitutes a breach of that duty. Therefore, Mrs. Kahn could have a civil action against Mr. Tobin for the damages she suffered as a result of his negligence. Additionally, since Mr. Tobin was acting within the scope of his employment as a travel agent, his employer could also be liable for his negligence due to the principle of vicarious liability. However, the employer may not have done anything wrong themselves. Therefore, choice A is the best answer. B is incorrect because libel is not relevant to the scenario described. C is incorrect since a travel agent does owe a duty of care to their customers. D is incorrect because intention is not relevant to negligence. E is incorrect because false imprisonment does not apply in this scenario.

Mrs Kahn Arranged a Trip to Europe for Herself and Her