Reference no: EM132300359

Please help me with any two questions Instructions Answer ANY TWO of the questions below. Use your knowledge of TORTS to answer the questions. Use the FILAC approach to analyse legal problems. mm Truworths is a large apparel distribution company with a diverse workforce that includes a large corporate division. Known for providing its interns with a wide breadth of experience, helpful mentors, and generous remuneration, it is not surprising that its annual internship-selection process is very competitive. Faced with a barrage of applications from hopeful prospective interns, Truworth’s HR officer, Samual Youngi, devised a unique strategy that is now part of the initial selection process: All prospective interns are required to sit for test on basic business law principles. Only prospective interns who pass the test will be selected to participate in the second round of interviews. You are a prospective intern of Truworths and you are sitting for a test in business law. Answer ANY TWO OF the following tort-related questions by using the IRAC method of legal analysis. 1. Su was suspended pending an investigation after she had been caught smelling of alcohol at 10 am at her desk in the office. Frustrated about her situation, she went to Maxine, her supervisor, to request a second chance. Maxine refused to speak to Su so a furious Su stormed into her office, yelling, ‘You don’t want to mess with me, Old Woman. I know where you live and you know who my fiancé is’. Maxine knew that Su’s fiancé was a member of a notorious gang and she believed that Su’s fiancé could present imminent danger to her. Did Su’s conduct constitute a tort? (10) 2. It came to management’s attention that one of its former employees was spreading rumours about Truworths’ hiring practices, informing the public that Truworths was hiring illegal immigrants to work after hours, and was paying them only $8 per hour. Management believed these rumours were tarnishing Truworths’ reputation and could lead to unwarranted investigations. Could Truworths pursue legal action on the basis of a tort? (10) 3. Ajanta, the daughter of one of Truworths’ executives, worked at a retail store during weekends. One day, shortly before closing-time, her supervisor informed her and other casual workers that stock had been disappearing at an alarming rate. The supervisor suspected that one of the casual employees was pilfering stock, so he gave Ajanta and her fellow co-workers the following instruction: ‘No one will go home before I know who the thief is’. Ajanta and her co-workers were kept in the store until 11:00 pm before the supervisor allowed them to go home. The executive wants someone to pay for keeping his daughter locked-up against her will. Does he have any recourse against the store supervisor? (10) 4. Peter was employed as office manager at Truworths’ headquarters for 20 years. He passed away after a long battle with mesothelioma, a form of lung cancer that is caused by the presence of asbestos. His spouse, Rachel, alleged Peter was exposed to asbestos when his office’s walls were torn downa couple of years ago. At the time Truworths’ HR director refused to allow him to work from home during the renovations. Peter’s oncologist agrees that the four weeks’ exposure to asbestos most likely caused Peter’s lung cancer and eventual death. Rachel further contended that Truworths failed to conduct proper testing to ascertain if asbestos was present in Peter’s office even though it was found in other parts of the building. Would Rachel be successful if she choses to pursue legal action against Truworths? (10) 2 x 10 marks [20] Expert Answer Sanjeev Sanjeev answered this Was this answer helpful? 1 0 4,638 answers Ans 1 - Issue - Does the threatening words issued by Su amount to tort. Rule - a person is liable for the tort of Intimidation if he /she delivers a threat to another person that he/she will commit an act or use unlawful means against him /her, as a result of which the other person does / refrains from doing some act which he /she is entitled to. Application - On caught with smelling of Alcohol, Su Threatened Maxim with dire consequences, presumably of physical / emotional injury, if she does not give her a second chance. She is liable for the tort of Intimidation. Conclusion - Sue is liable for the tort of intimidation. Ans 2 Issue - Does the person's act of spreading rumours constitute a tort. Rule - For a defamation tort, following condition should be met. (a) Someone must make a statement,i.e. it should be spoken or expressed. (b) It should be published, which means it should be seen, heard or read by someone. (c) It should have caused an injury /loss to some person. (d) The statement should be false. (e) It should be unprivileged, i.e. it should not be under any immunity clause. Application - According to the facts, the rumours have not been published, i.e. there is no particular person who has listened or read them. Further, there is no evidence of an injury or loss resulted by the rumours. Though it is false and the person is not under privileged category. Conclusion - The above act comes under slander, and not under the tort of defamation, hence the company can't sue him for tort.