Business of Law Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2250 words

Business of Law - Essay ExampleTask 1 mother and Tort As far as the elusion is concerned it can be understood that Alice and Cyril had been to violet pumpkin for their lunch where after having their forage, both suffer from food poisoning. The fact that needs to be considered in this case is that empurpled Pumpkin is actually responsible for the food that they serve to their customers since they are the customers to Purple Pumpkin and not the companies that supply the food. It was supposed to be the potential liability of Purple Pumpkin to test the food that is supplied to them before providing them to the customers. Hence Purple Pumpkin can be sued by Alice and Cyril in this case. Considering the tort of inattention in this case, in the first step of the law that states about the duty of care, it can be verbalize that neither the act of the defendant or Purple Pumpkin or the consequences were not foreseeable nor at that place existed any legal or physical closeness among th e two parties. However from the losses or the poor of the customers, there taking legal actions against Purple Pumpkin can be considered to be fair and just. ... This includes the third base stage of the law of tort of negligence that considers the issue of the damage caused by the defendant. As the law states in terms of the remoteness of damage and as suitable in this particular case, The defendant will be responsible for the harm caused to a claimant with a weakness or predisposition to a particular lesion or illness (Tufal, n.d., p.3). Hence it can be concluded on this case that Alice and Cyril being the suffered customers of Purple Pumpkin can sue the organization for providing them with foods that caused food poisoning to them. However they would require proving that it was the food supplied by that organization that caused them the poisoning. Moreover, on the part of the company, Purple Pumpkin may sue Mactavish Sea Foods Ltd that had supplied the lobsters to the organizat ion proving the same. obligation at Contract and Liability at Tort A Contrast The primary difference in the liability at contract and liability at tort is in the fact that the responsibilities assumed in contracts are completely voluntary. Thus there arises no force on any individual for the liabilities to be maintained. On the other hand, in case of tort, the potential liabilities are enforced on the individuals without letting them go or be aware of such potential liabilities. The law sometimes requires compulsory insurance to treasure against claims of liability in negligence or other torts, but it may be prudent for businesses to tolerate insurance for their property and possessions in the event of claims against them (Negligence and Nuisance, n.d., p.257). Thus it can be said that in case of contracts, the law of contract would enable