Tort Cases and Risk Management Plan

This document discusses various tort cases involving Rosie's business, including negligence, defamation, and contributory negligence. It also provides insights into a risk management plan for businesses, including insurance, employee training, and legal issues.

Name
Instructor
Course
Date
Tort Cases
PART 1
1. The case of Rose and her business of a shop and café raises several issues concerning various
torts committed to her customers by both Rosie and some of her staff members. The following
are the torts raised in the Rosie’s case scenario; Public nuisance, tort of negligence, tort of
defamation, tort of deceit and contributory negligence.
2. Three torts with possibility of being proven in a civil action.
a) Negligence
An action for the tort of negligence can be raised into two different courses of actions from this
case scenario. In the first case of negligence the Plaintiff will be Marc while the defendant will
be Rosie Gourmet. Under this action the defendant will be raising liability for defective meal that
does not meet the required safety and hygiene standards. The case of Donoghue v Stevenson
[1932] AC 562 tried to establish the duty of care as one of the element of proving negligence.
The case also established the neighbour principle. The following are therefore the element of tort
of negligence;
Surname 1

Duty of care- the defendant must owe the plaintiff a certain duty of care which must be exercised
during offering of any services to the plaintiff.
Breach of Duty- in exercising the duty of care, the defendant must act within certain reasonable
standards. Acting below those standards results to breach of duty of care
Damage- as a result of the breach the plaintiff must suffer an injury or harm
Proximate cause- the substandard act of the defendant should be the direct cause of the damage
suffered hence the plaintiff must establish a direct causal connection between the careless
conduct and the damage suffered.
The above elements were also illustrated in the case of Grant v Australian Knitting Mills (1933)
50 CLR 387.
In the second case of negligence the plaintiff will be Lulu while the Defendant will still be Rosie
Gourmet. The plaintiff will prove the above elements of negligence as a cause to her slip and fall
accident as discussed above. The plaintiff will be awarded the following types of damages upon
success of his suit; economic damages for medical bills incurred to treat Marc and injury caused
to Lulu as a result of falling and the cost of torn dress, aggravated damages for mental anguish
that Marc might have suffered and the shame and disgrace caused to Lulu when she fell on the
ground and finally punitive or exemplary damages to punish Rosie and deter her form repeating
the same mistakes again.
b) Defamation
The tort of defamation is categorized into libel and slander. Rosie is liable for the tort of libel as
a defendant while the plaintiff is Neighbour café. The following are the elements for Libel; the
Surname 2

statements made must be false, and with intention to maliciously cause damage to the reputation
of another. The statement must be made to a third party or the public in a printed, written or
published manner. Neighbour café can file a civil suit under defamation requiring to be
compensated in terms of the following damages; special damages due to loss suffered as a result
of damaged reputation; general damages for public disgrace, humiliation and disgrace caused to
the plaintiff in public and lastly punitive damages for punishment of the defendant and
deterrence.
c) Public nuisance
Rosie as the plaintiff has a recourse against his neighbour next-door selling marijuana that is
causing public nuisance through weed smell to Rosie’s customers. Rosie needs to prove the
following elements for public nuisance; it must be an act or mission interfering with the quiet
and peaceful enjoyment of the environment by people. The nuisance must not have lasted
beyond the prescription period which is 20 years at the time it is being reported. Upon
successfully instituting the matter Rosie is liable to the following remedies, injection through a
stop and desist order, special damages, punitive and general damages.
3. Rosie as the employer is vicariously liable for the tort of deceit committed by Crosby to the
customers. Vicarious liability is liability without fault and it is common in employer-employee
relationship where the employer is held vicariously liable for civil wrongs committed by the
employee while acting in the course of employment. Crosby is an employee of Rosie.
4. An instance of contributory negligence is out rightly manifested in Lulu’s slip and fall
accident incident. Despite Rosie Gourmet having left soup on the floor posing a risk, Lulu
Surname 3

contributed to her slip and fall accident by texting on phone while walking hence she was not
keen to look around her environment safety.
PART 2
Risk Management plan
Insurance is important to cover insurable risks such as disasters like fire. Employees need to be
trained on good personal relationship with customers to avoid injuring the integrity and goodwill
of the business. The employees need to understand legal issues at work place laws such
workplace safety which is the duty of the employer. Employees must also learn how to adhere to
safety standards set by the employer. The employer should set up an organizational design that
should meet the purposes, goals and objectives of the business.
Organisation design will also involve matters such as coordination, division of labour, effective
communication and proper form of the business for incorporation. Legal issues in a business,
disaster management, workers safety, and customers’ occupational safety and customer relations
are key components of a business risk management plan that if well considered there is a
likelihood of the business continuing for a very long period of time. The risk plan enables the
business to minimize costs and losses as it maximizes on profits.
Surname 4