A woman shopper was injured when she slipped on the tiled foyer of a supermarket, which was wet after rain. The defendant argued that it wasn’t responsible for the slippery condition of the floor, and that it owed no general duty of care in negligence. As it had mopped the floor to minimise danger to customers, there was no unusual danger that would give rise to a strict liability on the occupier. How do you think a court might assess the defendant’s claim of no liability?

A woman shopper was injured when she slipped on the tiled foyer of a supermarket, which was wet after rain. The defendant argued that it wasn’t responsible for the slippery condition of the floor, and that it owed no general duty of care in negligence. As it had mopped the floor to minimise danger to customers, there was no unusual danger that would give rise to a strict liability on the occupier. How do you think a court might assess the defendant’s claim of no liability?

Similar questions

In what has been subsequently known as the 'narrow rule', the House of Lords found that a duty of care exist even if the defendant was not present. Accordingly, manufacturers of goods must take reasonable steps to ensure that their products do not cause injury to those that subsequently come into contact with them. Lord Atkin went on to propose a general maxim of law known as the 'neighbour principle' which would apply generally and preclude the claimant needing to bring the facts of their case within those of a previous case. REQUIRED: Concisely sets out what the claimant has to prove in order to succeed in an action in Negligence. 2. Comment on the situation where the chain of event is broken by an intervening cause.
An individual who has liability, medical payments, uninsured motorist, other than collision, collision, crashed into a flower shop. Damage to the shop would be paid under which coverage? A- collision coverage B- uninsured motorist C- medical payments D- liability
Assume a defendant is observed by police officer A walking down the street carrying a weapon. A few moments later, the defendant is observed by police officer B walking down another street carrying the same weapon. Defendant, a convicted felon, is arrested and charged two counts of illegal possession of a weapon. Has he committed two crimes, or one? If only one, the Double Jeopardy clause prohibits two convictions for the same offense. If you conclude only one offense has occurred, how did the state convince the court otherwise in Commonwealth v. Horne
Discuss the concept of strict liability. Should this be applicable to businesses in product liability cases? Is this fair? What if a business is extremely cautious and yet a person is injured by the product? Why would it make sense to hold the business (who was not negligent) liable?
An intruder entered through a window and raped McCutchen in her apartment. MCutchen sued the landlord, Ten Associates, for failure to provide adequate security and failure to warn her of the risk of intrusion through the window. Ten Associates claimed that they had no way of anticipating an intruder. Evidence was introduced that revealed the landlord knew or should have known of a prior rape and numerous intrusions through apartment windows. Does it appear that Ten Associates was negligent in providing for the security of tenants?
Case4 One afternoon, the plaintiff (P) and her husband were out driving for picnic together with their three children. They pull-over in a lay-by, a designated pave area beside a main road where cars can stop temporarily, for a picnic and the plaintiff took one of the children across the road to pick flowers. The defendant, Mr. Berry (D), was driving recklessly and crashed into the couple’s van, where the plaintiff’s husband and the other children were preparing. The plaintiff’s husband was seriously hurt by the crash and died at the scene a few hours later while most of the children suffered injuries. The plaintiff witnessed the entire event and its aftermath, developed long-term “morbid depression”, consequently. Please state the four basic elements of negligence. Plaintiff sued Mr. Berry for the cost and damages as a result from nervous shock that she suffered due to the negligence of the Defendant. Please state your reasons
Define Negligence.
Betty went to the cinema to watch the premiere of Hulk Mister. She bought the ticket and went into the cinema. As she sat down on the chair, the legs of the chair broke and she fell onto the ground injuring her lower back. It turned out that the chair was previously broken and has not been properly repaired by the staff of the cinema. She was hospitalised for a month and could not work during the time she was in the hospital. Required: Betty wants to start legal proceedings to claim damages from the cinema for the injury. Advise her of the legal grounds on which she can claim compensation from the cinema and discuss, with reference to relevant legal principles and cases, the necessary steps that Betty needs to go through in order to prove her case.
Karen is on the highway headed home from Toronto. Traffic is moving slowly and she sees that an accident is the cause of the slow down. As she gets up to the scene, she notices debris and car parts all over the highway. She panics realizing she will have no choice but to drive over it. As a result, her front tires blow out and she fears damage has been done to the underside of her vehicle as well. How would Karen's insurer typically assess this loss? Comprehensive claim, as she did not hit another auto. Collision claim, as it was a single vehicle, At Fault claim. Collision claim, as it was a single vehicle. Not at Fault claim. Liability claim, as it is the third party's fault for the debris on the road.
help
To successfully win a negligence lawsuit, what are the "elements" the plaintiff must prove and what three affirmative defenses are available to the defendant?
Dr. Susan Rice asks Bruce Goldman, CMA (AAMA), to instruct patient Dottie Tate in the use of a walker to prevent further falls at home. Dottie is silent as Dr. Rice leaves the examination room and Bruce proceeds to set the walker correctly. However, when Dottie sees that Bruce must once again put Dottie in a gait belt for her protection—the belt was used earlier in the examination to assess Dottie’s ability to ambulate—the patient gets feisty. She is visibly tired and ready to go home. “I’ll learn to use the walker if I have to, but I won’t wear that belt. It makes me feel like a baby. And it’s such a bother. Who wants to go through all that? We just don’t need it.” Answer the following questions, which are also found in the Reflection Activity for Chapter 32 of the textbook: What is the best action of the medical assistant? What is the best therapeutic response of the medical assistant? Could the situation have been avoided? If so, how? If not, why not?