Class Notes (836,147)
Canada (509,656)
BUSA 391 (11)
Lecture 5

Lecture 5.docx

3 Pages
154 Views
Unlock Document

Department
Business Admin
Course
BUSA 391
Professor
Leslie Beck
Semester
Fall

Description
Week 3; Lecture 5  If you are injured on someone’s property or if someone is injured on your property, they can sue you, which is why you should have liability insurance which will cover you  If they take over the case, they are most likely to settle, but you don’t want them to settle, you want to be proven to not be at fault and not have to pay higher insurance  Vicarious- not just tortuous acts of employees but also business partners (the also incur liability), if they carry out their partnership duties, then they can incur tort liability through vicarious liability  If they commit a tort (deceit), you can be liable for the tort, but not the criminal aspect of it  If the party who is the employee is not really an employee but an independent contractor, then the person who hired the independent contractor cannot be held responsible, you are liable for your employees because you hired, trained and paid them, and its your control and responsibility of their actions  Amount of money you owe to someone you are liable to  Money you use to compensate them, what happened, how much damages you are responsible for, compensate their losses  When another court makes a decision and a hierarchy of courts-persuasive courts (federal, provincial, most cases)  The only binding cases, precedents are only top chain courts, supreme court  Sunny feels badly about the situation but he didn’t mean to cause harm  In a court case you would have to prove that he knew he could cause harmintentional tort  In this context intentional in tort means that he did certainly intend on doing the action that caused the harm, in which he does know or doesn’t know that his act could cause harm  Specific deterrence-punish criminal for their act so they won’t do it again  In this particular case, it doesn’t matter he didn’t intend to do harm, he did intend to do the act in which he knew harm would occur and therefore will be liable.  E.g. there was an aboriginal woman who was flown down to an English hospital in GTA. She had a caesarean, she signed the normal waiver and understood they were cutting her open to take her baby out. The doctor did it very carefully and very well, no negligence.  When he was sewing her up, he sewed in a bunch of beads. The women woke up and she could see the beads and so could the nurses, and then he said its because “Indians like beads”  Perfectly good, no negligence operation, but still was a battering tort, particular danger for doctors who operate without clarifying what patients desires are, the kind of consent you have to give to a hospital are confirmed consent, in which you know the risks and consequences of the treatment/surgery Chapter four- #2 The defendant is the person representing who prevented the person from walking a certain pathassociation of imprisonment (plaintiff is Henley) Regina is carrying out wishes of oxford rowing association, not acting on her own Whether or not she is under vicarious liability or personally liable In law, Henley will have to prove that he was detained in a fixed area, because if you’re imprisoned and had another path, then you wouldn’t be imprisoned Preventing someone from going on their w
More Less

Related notes for BUSA 391

Log In


OR

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


OR

By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.


Submit