She is unhappy about the unnecessary expense this statute imposes on her business and intends to file suit against the state of Confusion in an attempt to overturn the statute. In this paper I will discuss, which court will have jurisdiction over Tanya’s suit and whether the statute set-up by the state of Confusion is constitutional. I will list the stages in a civil suit and explore what provisions of the United States Constitution will be functional by the courts to determine the statute’s validity. Because the state of Confusion set- up this law, most likely they will not bulge in changing the law. Especially if one views that Tanya Trucker is the only complainant.
Law Chapelton v Barry Urban District Council shows that unsigned exclusion clauses need to be clearly defined to a reasonable person. Another case highlighting the need for exclusions to be clearly informed to the other party is the case of Causer v Browne. As for the case of White v John Warwick & Co Ltd the court held that the company providing defective product is liable for their negligence. If reasonably sufficient notice is given as to the existence of an exemption clause, then it is accepted by the courts that that clause becomes parts of the contract. The case that set this dictum, and which laid our the guidelines for testing the reasonableness and sufficiency of the notice
One needs to consider whether the sinking of the ship was an isolated event that was easily corrected, or whether it was a serious flaw that would require costly repairs. What needs to be answered regarding the flaw is whether the vendor, Captain Jack Sparrow, should have been aware of such a flaw; that is, was the flaw as a result of a patent or latent defect. If such defect was latent, was it known to the vendor. At common law, Davey Jones should also consider the principles of product liability, a branch of negligence law, arguing that Captain Jack Sparrow Inc. sold him a defective product that was not fit for its intended and known purpose. Davey Jones could also argue misrepresentation—he was induced to enter into the contract based on representations made about the quality of the ship.
The tortfeasor’s act was the proximate cause of injuries or damages. Damages were incurred. (Textbook p.150) ANALYSIS The fact remain that there was an accident, an injury occurred from the accident and negligence was evident. Officer Ruthless was negligent but was justified in the decision. He had to uphold the curfew law.
If the claim cannot be resolved then a submission to a court is made. “An application may indeed complain of both unfair dismissal and unlawful termination. This is generally made to either the Federal Court of Australia or the Federal Magistrates Court of Australia” (Stewart 2007, p.312). Stewart (2007, p.442) suggests that once an employee raises one of the reasons for the termination, the onus is forced upon the employer to establish that the employment was not terminated for that particular reason, or for any reasons including that particular reason. As outlined in K. Piggin v MCK Pacific Pty Ltd t/a Regency and Collins Showerscreens 2002 case in determining, for the purposes of the arbitration, whether a termination was harsh, unjust or unreasonable, the Commission must have regard to whether there was a valid reason for the termination related to the capacity or conduct of the employee or to the operational requirements of the employer's undertaking, establishment or service; and whether the employee was notified of that reason and given an opportunity to respond to any reason related to the capacity or
To successfully invoke this defense, the purchaser or occupier had to establish that it had no reason to know that the property was contaminated. Since the problem with brownfields is the existence or suspicion of contamination, the defense was largely unavailable to prospective developers or tenants of brownfield sites. To eliminate this obstacle to redevelopment of brownfields, the Brownfield Amendments created the BFPP defense for landowners or tenants who knowingly acquire or lease contaminated property after January 11, 2002. Only those parties that qualify for the BFPP defense are potentially subject to the windfall lien. To qualify for the BFPP, the owner or tenant must establish by a preponderance of the evidence that it has satisfied the following eight conditions: • All disposal of hazardous substances occurred before the purchaser acquired the facility.
Under California law, trespass to chattels "lies where an intentional interference with the possession of personal property has proximately caused injury." (Thrifty-Tel, Inc. v. Bezenek (1996) 46 Cal.App.4th 1559, 1566, 54 Cal.Rptr.2d 468, italics added.) In cases of interference with possession of personal property not amounting to conversion, "the owner has a cause of action for trespass or case, and may recover only the actual damages suffered by reason of the impairment of the property or the loss of its use." (Zaslow v. Kroenert, supra, 29 Cal.2d at p. 551, 176 P.2d 1, italics added; accord, Jordan v. Talbot (1961) 55 Cal.2d 597, 610, 12 Cal.Rptr. 488, 361 P.2d 20.)
Factors for consideration a. law’s non-logical implications in interpretation what parties would’ve agreed to (ex. Haines: duration and scope of contract) - policy: at-will doctrine in employment: policy - would’ve agreed to terms had they anticipated situation - had in mind, but didn’t express it b. context - what is the objective of the contract? Is it ambiguous? Ex. Spaulding v. Morse (369): stop yearly payment to trust during time in armed services - enforce according to terms if unambiguous, consider context if terms are ambiguous - not only context at time of contract formation, but also what happened AFTER ⇨ changed circumstances - why look at context?
2.19 Explain what the following statement by Handel (1982, p. 36) means and provide an argument to either support or oppose the contention. Things may exist independently of our accounts, but they have no human existence until they become accountable. Things may not exist, but they may take on human significance by becoming … Accounts define reality and at the same time they are that reality… The processes by which accounts are offered and accepted are the fundamental social process. 3.18 A newspaper article entitled ‘Hannes “knew of TNT valuation”’ (Australian, 18 June 1999, p. 24) reported a case involving a person who was before the courts on a charge of insider trading. In part, the article stated: Macquarie Bank executive director Simon Hannes learnt of the value the bank had placed on TNT shares three months before the transport giant was subject to a takeover bid by Dutch company KPN, a jury heard yesterday.
When you retire to the jury room, you will be asked two questions. First, did the negligence of either R.C. Brahman or Mahal Amrit proximately cause the occurrence in question? If you answer yes, then you will be asked to find the percentage of responsibility attributable to the negligent party. Remember, the occurrence in question is the damage to the bull, not the wreck between Kelly Hereford and Mrs. Amrit.