Business Law and Ethics: A Detailed Report on Negligence and Liability

This report provides a detailed analysis of a business law and ethics case focusing on the concept of negligence. The case involves a yoga instructor, Charlene, and a student, Skye, where Skye is injured due to Charlene's alleged negligence. The report explores the legal principles of duty of care, breach of duty, and damages, referencing relevant case laws like Condon v Basi and Donoghue v Stevenson. It outlines the four key elements a plaintiff must prove in a negligence claim: duty of care, breach of duty of care, damages, and the injury not being too remote. The report also discusses the responsibilities of parties involved in business relationships and the implications of failing to meet legal obligations, ultimately concluding that Charlene may be liable for Skye's injuries due to her failure to ensure a safe environment. The report emphasizes the importance of following business laws and ethics to maintain smooth operations and protect parties involved in contractual agreements.

BUSINESS LAW AND
ETHICS

Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................................................................3
TASK........................................................................................................................................................................3
CONCLUSION........................................................................................................................................................6
REFERENCES.........................................................................................................................................................7

INTRODUCTION
Business law is the legal term in which define various rules and policies. In which
define appropriate procedure which is have to be follow by all parties. In which two or more
parties comes in the contractual relationship. They are mutually comes in the legal agreement
which having stamp of both the parties. According to tort of negligence, one party is
responsible to take care of another party if they failed to do so then have to pay compensation
for the same. In the present report, there is a given case in which two parties Charlene and
Skyp. Due to negligence of Cherlene got injured and wants to file against her (Parmo,
Coddou and Guiloff, 2013). But at the time of file case against defendant, plaintiff needs to
proof some important points in front of court. Government has framed various types of rules
which have to follow by all the parties which are imposed on them as per the law.
TASK
The negligence liability has been arises when one party is responsible to take care
another party but failed to do so. The tort of negligence is able to create liability for harm to
any party. The government is empowered by the legal authorities to framed various types of
rules, regulation and policies which are imposed on them as per the law. They have to fulfil
their duties and responsibility which are imposed on them (Gruioniu, 2014). But at the time
of file claim plaintiff needs to proof some points which are required as per the legal terms.
On the basis of given scenario, Charlene is the Yoga instructor who received
certificate in Yoga instruction from the Australian Yoga institute. Her regular job is physical
education provided to the people in order to make them physically fit and healthy. She felt
that Yoga is the like a physical discipline which is able to involve stretching muscles as well
as holing various types of complex and difficult postures. As the time passes becomes the
vary good Yoga teachers and large number of people and are uses her services. After
sometime she started classes with her own name which is attended by approx 25 students .
She conduct classes in two days Tuesday nights and Thursday nights. And around 25 students
are attend classes classes in each class (De George, 2011). Each person pay an advance
amount to her for the services which are provided by her to people. Charlene instructed to
student to wear socks when they comes in the premises.
Skye is the person who late join the Yoga classes so that, she is not aware with the
instruction of defendant because plaintiff late join the classes. The hot tea and towel are

placed besides the Yoga classes (Big Problems with Laws Regulating Business. 2017). One
day, Skye comes in the premises without wearing socks. For the same reason she fells down
on the slippery floor and got injured due to negligence of defendant. In that case plaintiff is
able to file claim for the damages which are caused due to negligence.
In that case Charlene is responsible to take care of health of their students but she
failed to do so then her one student is got injured (Bageac, Furrer and Reynaud, 2011).
Parties are bound to follow rules and regulation which are imposed on them.
Case: Condon v Basi, 1985, in that case it has been defined that defendant is responsible to
take care plaintiff but breach the duty then they are liable to pay compensation amount to tp
another party. In that case defendant conduct very huge amount of carelessness regards
plaintiff.
According to tort of negligence, if plaintiff wants to file against defendant then they
have to prof some important points in court. As per the given scenario, Skyp needs to proof
some points which are related to the damages which are caused to them.
Tort of negligence refer to as the activity through which one person is liable for the harm of
another due to avoid some important things which are related to an individual. The person
who attempt promote this duty is known as the plaintiff who files the case against to other
person and the person whom against the case is filed is known as the defendant. This act is
void under any tort of negligence activity. There are four major things which a person have to
prove to file a case against defendant:
1. Duty of care
2. Breach of duty of care
3. Damages
4. Damages not able to remote
All these things have to be prove by plaintiff for sue against a person who is responsible for
that. The present case is based on the Skye and Charley in which it is found that due to tort of
negligence of Charley the whole damage have to bear by the Skye (Vranceanu, 2014).
Charley become careless and thus all the harm have to bear by the Skye. This tort of

negligence get done because Skye join the classes too late and that's why she is not learn that
she have to wear shocks in Yoga class (Fassin and Buelens, 2011). Also Charley not
mentioned such things to her that's why this activity took place. Following are some of the
statement which Skye have to prove so that she can prove that tort of negligence took place.
Duty of care: The duty of care states that if any kind of activity get done through
which a physical and careless act get done due some omission. According to this thing Skye
have to prove that Charley do not provide proper care to her and that's why she got burned.
Plaintiff have to prove that whole duty of responsibility is related with the defendant and thus
she can claim compensation on this concern (Grassl and Habisch, 2011). If Skye going to
prove that the defendant owned duty of care then she will need to discuss the breach of duty.
All these things are related with each other.
For example; A is the person who suffered from some deceases admitted in the hospital, so
that doctors are under an obligation to take care of A. according to law it is the duty of care of
doctor.
Case : Donoghue v Stevenson, 1932, in this case Donoghue act as an plaintiff who purchased
ginger beer and ice cream from the shop. After opening the bottle of beer claimant realized
that there is decomposed snail which is emerged from ginger beer bottle and some personal
injury caused to her. On the basis of same issue, Donoghue file claim against manufacture in
order to receive compensation for the damages.
Breach of duty of care: A duty of care breach came when a defendant become
responsible for the act which is done due to negligence. Duty of care get breach at that time
when a person failed in taking care of another person (Swanson and Frederick, 2016). So for
avoiding such type of things they have to properly conduct all the things in a proper and
appropriate manner. In the present scenario Charley is responsible for the tort of negligence
against Skye. In this concern if Skye going to prove that Charley is responsible then she will
have to bear all the compensation against this.

For example; X is the financial accountant of Adil. X is under an obligation to take care
financial account of his client. But he missed some important document of Adil which are not
able to recover. It is breach of duty of care according to provisions of law.
Case : Vaughan v Menlove, 1837, in that case the defendant has been argued that he used
best and possible judgement and not able to foresee the risk which is related to fire. The court
has defined that the bets and possible judgement is not enough.
Damages: If plaintiff will not lead to fail in prove that the duty of negligence is along
with the defendant then it should get defendant have the right to sue against the plaintiff also.
Hence for this the main work of plaintiff is to prove that defendant really negligent the duty
of care and breach the duty of care (Norman, 2011). According to the present scenario if there
is any kind of tort of negligence found against the Charley then whole damage responsibility
is associated with her. Hence she have to bear the compensation amount which she will going
to pay to Skye.
Case : Bolitho v City & Hackney Health Authority, 1997, as per this case, there is 2 years old
child who suffering from breathing problem. The doctor not attend her bleep that which was
not working because of low battery but child died. After that file claim against doctor that she
intubated the child. But doctor provide evidence that she attend the child but not intubated.
On the basis of following evidences, the trial judge declares that there was no breach of duty
is conducted.
Injury not remote- Skpe is also able to proof that the injury which is caused to her is
not able to remote and must be able to receive compensation for the same. It is the legal term
which means the things which caused damages to plaintiff is able to recoverable or subject
matter is not available in the market. But at the end, the person who found guilty in the eyes
of law have to pay compensation equal to amount mentioned under the law.
For example; A and his wife setting in the car and went some where while travelling B driven
with drunk and both cars crashed. After that A's wife died on spot. A having a right to file
against B and damages thing is not available in market.

Case : Smith v Leech Brain, 1962, widow file claim against defendant that her husband was
employed by him. Due to their negligence her husband's lips burn and which contained pre
cancerous cells. These things are able to incurred injury to her husband after that he died. So
that, plaintiff is able to file against other party and able to receive compensation.
According to all such things it get identify that if Charley informed to Skye that
wearing of shocks is compulsory while Yoga then this accident might not get proceed (Nica,
2013). Also it is the major duty of her to inform all important information which are related
with the classes to Skye.
CONCLUSION
From the above mentioned report it has been concluded that there are many laws and
acts that may affect the business in many ways. As per the tort of negligence Cherlene is able
to fulfil her duty to take care her students who are attend the classes of Yoga. According to
this law if plaintiff wants to sue defendant then they must proof some significant points
which in court. These laws can protect the relations among all the customers and business
owners so that overall operations can be run in more smooth ways. In this, both the parties
have to follow their rules and regulations on the basis of the contract that is made in between
them. It is the responsibility of local bodies to make these laws so that different people can
resolve their issues. In this one party have to take care of another and if they get failed in
doing this they are liable to pay compensation to another party.

REFERENCES
Books and Journals
Bageac, D., Furrer, O. and Reynaud, E., 2011. Management students’ attitudes toward
business ethics: A comparison between France and Romania. Journal of Business
Ethics. 98(3). pp.391-406.
De George, R.T., 2011. Business ethics. Pearson Education India.
Fassin, Y. and Buelens, M., 2011. The hypocrisy-sincerity continuum in corporate
communication and decision making: A model of corporate social responsibility and
business ethics practices. Management Decision. 49(4). pp.586-600.
Grassl, W. and Habisch, A., 2011. Ethics and economics: Towards a new humanistic
synthesis for business. Journal of Business Ethics. 99(1). pp.37-49.
Gruioniu, O., 2014. On ethics, economy and capitalism. An Aristotelian approach. Revista de
Stiinte Politice. (41). p.84.
Nica, E., 2013. Social Responsibility, Corporate Welfare, and Business Ethics.
Psychosociological Issues in Human Resource Management. 1(1). pp.9-14.
Norman, W., 2011. Business ethics as self-regulation: Why principles that ground regulations
should be used to ground beyond-compliance norms as well. Journal of Business
Ethics. 102(1). pp.43-57.
Parmo, D.L., Coddou, A. and Guiloff, M., 2013. Constitutional Law in Chile. Kluwer Law
International.
Swanson, D.L. and Frederick, W.C., 2016. Denial and leadership in business ethics
education. Business ethics: New challenges for business schools and corporate
leaders. pp.222-240.
Vranceanu, R., 2014. Corporate profit, entrepreneurship theory and business ethics. Business
Ethics: A European Review. 23(1). pp.50-68.
Online
Big Problems with Laws Regulating Business. 2017. [Online]. Avail;able through:
<http://business.laws.com/business-ethics/laws-regulating-business>. [Accessed on
16th May 2017].