🏷️ LIMITED TIME OFFER: GET 20% OFF GRADE+ YEARLY SUBSCRIPTION →
Log in
HomeClass Notes1,200,000CA670,000

ADMS 2610 Lecture Notes - Deontological Ethics, Anti-Satellite Weapon, Fiduciary

73 views6 pages
amberclam406
25 Jun 2012
School
York University
Department
Administrative Studies
Course
ADMS 2610
Professor
William Pomerantz

For unlimited access to Class Notes, a Class+ subscription is required.

Document Summary

A wrong commited by one person to another. Jehovah not allowed blood transfusion - surgeon gave them one - they sued - doctor is not liable. Accompanied by threat of violence or injury. Defences: provocation (only affects punitive damages) ii) Self-defence (only if force used reasonable and necessary) Fence because the person was way to drunk to defend themselves. Restraint or confinement of individual by person who has no lawful right to do so (exception - po- lice with reasonable grounds) Person seized in process of committing a crime. Innocent person falsely seized but with reasonable and probably grounds to believe that person committed a crime (not mere suspicion) False statements that significantly injure one"s private, professional, or business reputation. 5. 2: slander - (spoken) statements or gestures, libel (e. g. printed slander) Defences: true; ii) iii) of public interest) Absolute privilege (e. g. parliament, courts, public inquiries, etc) Qualified privilege (e. g. letter of reference, fair comment and criticism in matters.

Get access

Grade+20% off
$8 USD/m$10 USD/m
Billed $96 USD annually
Grade+
Homework Help
Study Guides
Textbook Solutions
Class Notes
Textbook Notes
Booster Class
40 Verified Answers
Class+
$8 USD/m
Billed $96 USD annually
Class+
Homework Help
Study Guides
Textbook Solutions
Class Notes
Textbook Notes
Booster Class
30 Verified Answers

Related Documents

ADMS 2610 Lecture Notes - Lecture 3: Plasma Display, Punitive Damages, False Imprisonment
aquamarinebutterfly847
ADMS 2610 Lecture Notes - Lecture 4: Defamatory Libel, Unfair Business Practices, Qualified Privilege
lemonrat951
ADMS 2610 Lecture Notes - Lecture 4: Eaves, Pg. 99, Fiduciary
eringoldfish337

Related Questions

You are a representative in the NHL Players Association, responsible for ensuring the integrity of the game and supporting rules that maintain/increase the fan base. Under current rules, a player who receives a game misconduct penalty is suspended for the remainder of the game and is sent to the team's dressing room. The player also incurs a $200 fine. There are additional fines and suspensions outlined for incurring multiple game misconducts. With a match penalty, the offending player is indefinitely suspended from the league pending a decision by the commissioner. While the penalty seems straight-forward, it has not deterred intentional violence on the ice. Using the following info, propose what you believe to be the best solution to the problem of intentional violence among NHL players. Contract details:

The average base salary for a center=$3,063,873

Salary increase for a physically dominant player= $300,000

Penalty for unnecessary violence ("boarding") when detected=$100 fine and suspension for one (or more) games

Detection rate: referees continually monitor players for intentional misconduct on the ice.

Q. You run a small janitorial service in your town. You know that a rival company has the contract to clean the public areas at the local college. You send advertisements to almost every business in town, including the college. Those advertisements focus on your all-natural cleaning products, your commitment to helping your clients recycle, and your reduction in waste. Your advertisement is accurate and widely distributed. You receive a call from the college administration asking you when you can begin your sustainable work at the college. Soon after starting, you are sued by your rival for wrongful interference. Explain whether or not your actions constitute wrongful interference.

Answer feedback: Wrongful interference with a contractual relationship requires a valid, enforceable contract between two parties, the third party with knowledge of that contract, and the intentional inducing of one party to breach that contract. In this situation, there is a valid contract between the college and your rival. You know about that contract. But your actions in advertising are not an intentional inducement to breach the contract. While you do intend to attract new clients, you sent the advertisement out broadly. This is justified or permissible interference. This is known as bona fide competitive behaviour. The college may have breached its contract with your rival, but since you did not specifically target or induce the college to intentionally breach that contract, you should not be liable.

Which of the following is a true statement?
a. The breach of duty element in the test for negligence liabilityin the U.S. is governed predominantly by the reasonable personstandard.
b. The doctrine of res ipsa loquitur can apply if an event causingthe harm normally does not occur in the absence ofnegligence.
c. A battery occurs only if the victim suffers actual seriousphysical harm, that is, the victim is “battered.”
d. One may be able to recover damages for emotional distress in atort lawsuit for negligence.

Which of the following is a true statement?
a. A legitimate business reason for a neutral employment practicethat has a disproportionate effect or adverse impact on minoritiesmay allow the employer in the U.S. to avoid legal liability fordiscrimination.
b. Under the U.S. Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, disabledjob applicants are not entitled to “reasonable accommodation” inemployment since that surely would cost employers some money.
c. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act does not cover or reachemployees’ conduct in the online or “virtual” worlds.
d. An employer is not liable for Title VII Civil Rights Actsviolations committed by its lower level employees, only by itsmanagers and supervisors since the latter “should knowbetter.”