LAW 201 Lecture 2: Tutorial 2- Tort Law
3 Jul 2018
School
Department
Course
Professor
Tutorial #2: Torts Fact Pattern
Fact Pattern: On a lovely summer evening in July 2006, J (15) and his friend C (16) were drinking
and smoking marijuana in the small Ontario village of Paisley. After midnight, they went to walk
around the village. They were planning on stealing stuff from unlocked cars. They made it to
Rankin’s Garage, a used car dealer. The property wasn’t secured. The boys went in and started
looking for unlocked cars. They found an unlocked Toyota Camry parked behind the garage. The
keys were in the ashtray. Neither boy had a licence. They stole the car. C was driving. He
crashed the car. J suffered a catastrophic brain injury (persons cognitive and motor function is
damaged so much that they’ll never function normally again).
How to analyze a fact pattern:
Use FIRAC
Start with facts
Who are the parties, events and claims?
oPlaintiff (injured boy), car dealer and J (defendants), mother
oEvent: getting behind wheel and car crash
oClaims: compensation
What are the legal issues?
What is the Torts analysis?
oDamages?
Is the damages enough that they should get money? Yes
oDuty of care? A responsibility for one’s wellbeing/ not to put them at risk/ an
obligation not to be negligent
Did the defendants owe a duty of care?
oStandard of care? Tells us what the defendant needs to do to reach the
obligation to others
Level of care expected
oCausation?
Did your negligence cause the damage?
oRemoteness
Where in the analysis do you see a problem?
With damages?
With duty of care?
oDid the garage owe a duty of care to the boys?
With standard of care?
With causation?
With remoteness?
Is there a cause of action for pure negligence?
In order to get money in negligence case, plaintiff must prove damages, duty of care,
standard of care, but also has to prove that the negligence caused the damages
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
Document Summary
Fact pattern: on a lovely summer evening in july 2006, j (15) and his friend c (16) were drinking and smoking marijuana in the small ontario village of paisley. After midnight, they went to walk around the village. They were planning on stealing stuff from unlocked cars. The boys went in and started looking for unlocked cars. They found an unlocked toyota camry parked behind the garage. J suffered a catastrophic brain injury (persons cognitive and motor function is damaged so much that they"ll never function normally again). Who are the parties, events and claims: plaintiff (injured boy), car dealer and j (defendants), mother, event: getting behind wheel and car crash, claims: compensation. A responsibility for one"s wellbeing/ not to put them at risk/ an obligation not to be negligent. Tells us what the defendant needs to do to reach the obligation to others. Did your negligence cause the damage: remoteness.
