Question 1

A negligence victim experienced a prolonged recovery from injuries owing to an inherent physical weakness.What principle would a court apply to prevent a negligent defendant from escaping liability for full compensation in these circumstances?

Accepted Answer

The "thin skull" rule states that a defendant must take their victim as they find them. This means if a victim has a pre-existing condition or inherent weakness that makes their injuries more severe, the defendant is still liable for all the damages resulting from their negligence.

Question 2

Which statement best describes one of the features of strict liability?

Accepted Answer

Strict liability does not require the plaintiff to prove that the defendant was careless or at fault. Instead, the plaintiff must only prove that the defendant engaged in a certain activity that resulted in harm, making it a unique aspect of this legal principle.

Question 3

In the legal context,a manufacturer's responsibility for the design,manufacture,or sale of its products is synonymous with which of the following?

Accepted Answer

The manufacturer's responsibility for the design, manufacture, or sale of its products is directly related to the standard of care imposed by product liability. This legal concept holds manufacturers accountable for ensuring their products are safe for consumers and meet certain standards of quality and safety.

Question 4

What is the consequence of a finding that the plaintiff was contributorily negligent in a negligence action?

Accepted Answer

The answer of What is the consequence of a finding...

Question 5

When a court asks,"Did the defendant behave in the manner of a reasonable person?" what aspect of the tort of negligence is the court considering?

Accepted Answer

The court is considering whether the defendant breached the standard of care expected of a reasonable person in similar circumstances, which is a key aspect of determining negligence.

Question 6

Sony Corporation is thinking about having purchasers of its PlayStation product sign an arbitration clause that takes away their right to sue in court.What benefit might you reasonably expect Sony to achieve with such a clause?

Accepted Answer

Arbitration clauses typically aim to limit a company's exposure to class action lawsuits by requiring disputes to be resolved through arbitration rather than through court proceedings. This can significantly reduce legal costs and the potential for large-scale legal judgments against the company.

Question 7

How does the court's decision in Deloitte & Touche v Livent Inc impact the liability of auditors in Canada?

Accepted Answer

The court's decision in Deloitte & Touche v Livent Inc clarified that auditors will normally be liable only to their clients, emphasizing the importance of the contractual relationship between the auditor and the client. This decision impacts the scope of auditor liability by limiting it primarily to the client who has directly engaged the auditor's services, rather than extending it broadly to any third parties who might rely on the audited financial statements.

Question 8

The Supreme Court stated that a person suffering mental injury as a result of another's negligence must prove that such a mental injury would have occurred in a person of ordinary fortitude.The fortitude of an ordinary person is held by the same court to be irrelevant in circumstances where carelessness caused physical injury and loss.What common law principle offers a valid criticism of the Supreme Court's position of the law with respect to involuntarily acquired mental illness?

Accepted Answer

The thin skull principle, also known as the "eggshell skull rule," criticizes the Supreme Court's position by stating that a defendant must take their victim as they find them. This means if a person has a pre-existing condition that makes them more susceptible to injury, whether physical or mental, the defendant is still fully liable for the damages caused, even if the injuries are more severe than what would be expected in a person of ordinary fortitude.

Question 9

Why is the defence of volenti non fit injuria often unsuccessful?

Accepted Answer

The defense of volenti non fit injuria requires that both parties understand and agree that the defendant has assumed no legal responsibility for the plaintiff's welfare in the specific situation, making it difficult to prove.

Question 10

What is a distinguishing feature of European product liability law?

Accepted Answer

European product liability law is characterized by the principle of strict liability, meaning that a manufacturer can be held liable for a defective product without the need for the injured party to prove negligence or fault.

Question 11

Hector didn't read the waiver clause in the entry form before signing it and paying his entry fee to compete in a weekend slalom ski-racing event.His neck broke as he landed on top of a pile of large rocks,after an unexpected collision with Juri sent him through a thin,unsupported barrier of mushy walled ice.Which of the following would most strongly support the Supreme Court of Canada's position that,in these circumstances,the defence of volenti non fit injuria would fail?

Accepted Answer

A waiver might not truly reflect the signer's intentions, especially if not fully understood or read, which could invalidate the defense of volenti non fit injuria, implying voluntary assumption of risk.

Question 12

If a court finds Rudy's spinal injuries are also the result of Rudy encouraging Benj to drive his boat at the excessive speed that caused the accident,what will immediately come into play?

Accepted Answer

Volenti non fit injuria is a legal doctrine that means "to a willing person, no injury is done." If Rudy encouraged the excessive speed, he may have voluntarily assumed the risk, which could limit or negate his ability to claim damages.

Question 13

In which aspect of negligent misstatement does the term "an indeterminate class" arise?

Accepted Answer

The term "an indeterminate class" arises in the context of claims by non-clients, referring to the potential for a wide and unspecified range of individuals or entities to claim they have been adversely affected by a negligent misstatement, even though they do not have a direct client relationship with the professional or entity making the statement.

Question 14

In accordance with the Supreme Court of Canada's ruling in Crocker v.Sundance Northwest Resorts Ltd.,[1988] 1 S.C.R.1186,in Canada sliding down a hill in an oversized inner tube can NOT be viewed as constituting which of the following?

Accepted Answer

The answer of In accordance with the Supreme Court of...

Question 15

What is a distinguishing characteristic of the tort of negligent misstatement?

Accepted Answer

The answer of What is a distinguishing characteristic of the...

Question 16

Who would the law consider to be the 'reasonable person' for the purposes of the tort of negligence?

Accepted Answer

The 'reasonable person' in the context of negligence is typically considered to be an ordinary person of normal intelligence and prudence, serving as a standard for determining how a typical person would responsibly act in similar circumstances.

Question 17

Marsha was permanently disabled by a drunk driver in an automobile accident.Her lawyer missed the limitation date for filing her claim,causing further economic and psychological suffering to Marsha.What is the role of the thin skull rule in these circumstances?

Accepted Answer

The thin skull rule dictates that a defendant must take their victim as they find them, meaning if a victim has a pre-existing vulnerability (like a "thin skull"), the defendant is still fully liable for all damages caused, even if those damages are more severe because of the vulnerability. In Marsha's case, this rule would mean that the drunk driver (and potentially the lawyer for missing the filing deadline) cannot reduce the damages owed to Marsha because of her vulnerability to economic and psychological suffering.

Question 18

In the court's view,the law requires employees of a bar establishment to encourage a potentially intoxicated patron to not drive his or her automobile.This duty includes involving police,if necessary,to ensure the patron does not drive under the effects of alcohol consumption.What type of duty has the law imposed on the establishment and its employees?

Accepted Answer

The law imposes a positive duty on the establishment and its employees, requiring them to take specific actions (encouraging a potentially intoxicated patron not to drive and involving police if necessary) to prevent harm. This goes beyond merely refraining from harmful actions; it mandates proactive behavior.

Question 19

Which of the following is synonymous in negligence law with the statement "it is not enough to establish some of the steps or even most of them"?

Accepted Answer

This statement refers to the necessity for the plaintiff in a negligence case to prove every element of their claim to succeed. In negligence law, the plaintiff must establish duty, breach, causation, and damages. Failing to prove any one of these elements means the plaintiff's case cannot succeed, hence the requirement to prove "each and every step."

Question 20

What would you reasonably expect a European Union state court to base its findings on when determining a matter involving defective-product liability?

Accepted Answer

European Union product liability law is based on the concept of strict liability, meaning that a manufacturer can be held liable for a defective product regardless of fault or negligence.

Quiz 11: The Tort of Negligence