LAW ASSESSMENT

Business Law Assessment

Business Law Assessment

Question 2

Summarise Mr. Wagner's claim against the hotel owner, Talbot Group Investments and explain why the legal action was brought in the District Court in Brisbane.

An incident occurred in the hotel in Brisbane. A man named Mr. John Anthony Wagner lost his one eye sight when he fell and slipped in a bathroom of Brisbane hotel, and due to this loss he is suing the case against the owner of the hotel over allegations carelessness. The man was staying at the hotel in Brisbane when the accident happened. Court records lodged in the District Court of Brisbane, the lodged complain shows that Mr. Wagner put a shower tangle on the floor of the bathtub when he scrubbed down. At what time he tried to get out of the bathtub, the mat placed on the spot slipped and as a result he fell, his left eye hit on one of the taps. As a consequence of the fall Wagner is presently daze in that eye. He additionally endured cuts, scarring and stun. Mr. Wagner is currently taking the owner of the hotel to court, asserting they came up short in their obligation of forethought towards him. Mr. Wagner claims the hotel owner neglected to caution him about 'the potential of danger connected with the elusive nature of the bathtub '. He asserts they likewise neglected to furnish a handrail to aid with getting well and done with the bathtub, and contends that the shower tangle did not have sufficient traction. Mr. Wagner additionally asserts leftover cleaning items in the lowest part of the bathtub might have helped the fall. He is yet to verify the precise measure of harms he is asserting, however court archives recommend it could be more than $300,000. This sum might incorporate harms for past and prospective misfortune of profit.

What factors would the court consider to determine if Talbot Group Investments owed Mr. Wagner a duty of care?

The factors of a carelessness that the court can consider are: breach of duty, causation, harms. Such as, an Innkeeper regularly has a duty to ensure visitors from dangers of mischief on their premises. The incident happen, it may be on the grounds that the Innkeeper ruptured their obligation (Barron & Arcodia, 2002, pp. 15-27). Assuming that the visitor endures harms and the explanation for the harms was the breach, and then there may be an actionable claim of carelessness.

Assume that a duty of care was established. What factors would the court consider to determine whether or not that duty had been breached?

The legitimate issues included in hotel negligence case might be amazingly multifaceted. The court must consider the evidences before clearly and the precautions provided by the hotel management in case of any incidents. As the hotel had sufficient opportunity to address or enough caution visitors of the issue; and that genuine mischief was a sensibly predictable after-effect of the danger's vicinity (Weinrib, 1975, pp. 518-534). If the claim is true and there was ...