Business Law

 

You are required to write a 3000 words essay addressing the issues in the following scenario. You should address the issues using the IRAC method. A guide to using IRAC is included on the Module Moodle page.
The task Is : to advise all parties as to any legal issues that arise from this scenario!!!

Coursework Scenario
Part 1
Leonard and Penny, who live in Scotland, have booked to go away on holiday to London. They answered an advert in the newspaper saying

‘All-inclusive Hotel in England for 14 nights – £1500 per person
*Flights not included*
Contact The CalTech Hotel at 123 Coventry Road, London to book’

Leonard sends £3000 to the above address and states he and Penny wish to travel on 3rd June 2018. He waits a couple of days and when he doesn’t hear back from The CalTech Hotel he assumes everything is fine and goes ahead and books flights with SheldonAir.

What to explain:
1) what an offer and invitation to treat are
2) the advertisement place in the newspaper is an invitation to treat – explain why.
3) Leonard seeking an contacting hotel and just sent the money
4) Leonard can not sue the hotel because they have not received the money
5) Law of acceptance of contract, postal rule

Part 2
SheldonAir use excellent advertising to encourage usage of their airline. They show pictures of luxury Dreamliners and quotes from previous passengers stating how luxurious the airline is. One quote reads ‘Absolutely amazing service – Don’t take our word for it, come and find out for yourself!’ Leonard books a seat for him and Penny. When they board the aeroplane, it is in fact a much older plane with very little legroom. The staff are very friendly, and Leonard and Penny are given a complementary glass of Champagne. Leonard and Penny are furious and feel the airline has misrepresented themselves and demand a refund. (statement of fact)
What to explain:
1) investigate this part as an misrepresentation – actionable misrepresentation- use the spice girls case – “photographs”
2) Statement of fact
3) Use words maybe considered an implied term

When they arrive at The CalTech Hotel in London and try to check in Leonard and Penny are told that they not have a reservation. The representative claims to have never received any money from Leonard. Leonard shows the representative a proof of postage, to which he responds. ‘It doesn’t matter, we are fully booked now, and we were already fully booked then’.
Convinced he will be able to sue The CalTech Hotel for his money back…

As an example:
The first thing to consider in this scenario is whether or not Leonard and Penny have a valid reservation. At face value Leonard appears to have accepted the offer via post – which appears an acceptable means of communication as the advert provides a postal address (Henthom v Fraser). Should this be the case the reservation contract is formed at the moment the letter is posted under the postal rule (Adams v Lindsell) and it does not matter then the communication never arrives (Household Fire Ins v Grant) provided that is properly addressed (Getreide- Import- Gesellschaft MBH v Contimar Industrial Commercial y Mantima).

However, the issue then arises as to whether the offer was in fact an offer at all and therefore capable of being accepted. In order for something to be considered an offer it must be clear unambiguous and it must be communicated properly (Gibson v Manchester City Council). The advert in a newspaper it is a more of being unqualifiedly accepted. As the notice is an advert in a newspaper it is more likely to be treated as an invitation to treat as established in Patridge v Crittenden.

Therefore Leonard and Penny do not have a reservation and leonard will be unable to sue the hotel for his money back in fact Leonard will need to sue the post-office for failing to deliver his letter and for loosing his money

Part 3
Convinced he will be able to sue The CalTech Hotel for his money back Leonard books Penny and himself into the hotel across the street. The hotel insists all guests take out a travel insurance policy with them. Leonard and Penny agree. The form asks if either of them suffer from any illnesses. Leonard is lactose intolerant, but worried that mentioning that will increase the cost of the insurance. Leonard omits this detail from the form. Leonard’s insurance costs £50. Howard, another hotel guest who declares that he has lactose intolerance has to pay £75 for his insurance.
What to explain:
1) contractual issue
2) contarct law
3) breach of the contarct law
4) the hotel would not pay out if they lie

Part 4
As Leonard and Penny walk to their room a cricket ball from the neighbouring cricket ground flies over the fence and hits Penny on the head. Penny is not badly hurt, but her face is bruised, and she is very angry and upset. She vows to sue the cricket ground. Leonard is pre-occupied trying to help Penny and trips over a hammer than has been left on the path by maintenance workers employed by the hotel. He drops his iPad in the process and it is destroyed.

What to explain:
1) Negligence – duty of care
2) Apply the Caparo’s guidelines
3) Is it a relationship between the Penny and cricket ground (geographically relationship)
4) Was the damage reasonable and foreseeable?
5) The maintenance of workers will own the duty of care to Leonard
6) The likelihood of harm – use cases in the ppt

Theory:
The Claimant must show that:
 He was owed a duty of care by the defendant; (Factors Considered
 Likelihood of harm
Bolton v Stone (1951)
 Potential Seriousness of injury
Paris v Stepney Borough Council (1951)
 Cost and practicality of precautions
Latimer v AEC Ltd (1953)
 Importance of the activity
Watt v. Hertfordshire County Council (1954)
 Note: Situations involving children, sport & emergency

 That the Defendant breached that duty of care;
 The breach caused injury/ damage;
 And that damage was foreseeable and not too remote.
(Foreseeability of damage)

Caparo Industries v Dickman [1990] 1 All ER 568, HL
 Three questions need to be asked to decide whether a duty of care is owed in any given situation: (The Caparo Guidelines)
 Was damage reasonably foreseeable?
 Is there a relationship of proximity?(близость)
 Is it fair, just and reasonable to impose the duty?

Part 5
In very bad moods Penny and Leonard head across the road from the hotel to a local bar. Penny orders two cocktails for them both. Penny drinks her own without issue. As Leonard drinks his he notices several frogspawns floating in his drink. He is violently sick and suffers an episode of campylobacter (food poisoning).

With Leonard having to stay in the hotel room Penny goes out for the evening. She visits another bar where Amy is working as a barmaid. She orders a glass of red wine. As Amy hands the red wine to Penny her hand wobbles as she has overfilled the glass. It spills all over Penny’s white dress. Penny wants the dress dry-cleaned, by Amy, the next day.
What to explain:
1) Employment law
2) Amy owns a duty of care to Penny
3) Who is responsible? – Vicarious liability (description); case: multiple test and use the Salmonds test
4) Ask the question is it reasonable to do this? Amy clearly irresponsible to do this because she is a barman – she should have known how to handle the drink and not to do overfill it (duty of care).

Part 6
With her mood now at an all-time low Penny heads back to the hotel room. As she walks across the hotel grounds she spots a diamond ring in the bushes. She slips it into her pocket and for the first time since arriving a smile returns to her face. She mutters ‘Result’ under her breath.
What to explain:
1) Honest finder

Part 7
The next day Penny and Leonard decide to leave. When they arrive home they are inundated with letters from various travel companies. It turns out that The CalTech Hotel have sold Penny and Leonard’s personal data onto other travel providers for a profit.
What to explain:
1) Data protection issue

You should write the coursework having
1) Introduction
2) Main body
3) Conclusion

 

Sample Solution

ACED ESSAYS