Card Set Information
risk and law
Name three factors that might reduce or eliminate the awarding of damages to a plaintiff by the courts.
Contributory negligence and voluntary assumption of risk are defenses that attempt to prove what?
Success of the above noted defenses depend often on what three actions on the part of a business?
What is the legal rationale behind these defenses?
What is the main difference between Canada and the United States with regards to voluntary assumption
What is contributory negligence?
If contributory negligence is proved, in theory, who has the higher standard of care, the plaintiff or the defendant?
In fact what really happens in regards to question #7?
This is especially true if the defendant is seen as an expert. True or False?
Name three ways the plaintiff’s actions can contribute to the injuries.
The last three paragraphs deal with Scurfield v. Cariboo Helicopter Skiing Ltd. The wife of the deceased appealed the original court award of $1,100,000.00. What happened in the appeal court?
Who must prove voluntary assumption of risk?
In Canada, what is the best way to defend voluntary assumption of risk?
Why is “release language” included in a waiver?
Name three ways that voluntary assumption of risk can be proved.
Why are educational materials and safety talks important to give to a client?
Define the words expressly and implicitly.
Most often in the adventure industry, when does an express agreement take effect?
What is an implied agreement and are the often successful as a defense? Apportionment
Invent an example of apportionment.
At the end of the last sentence of the last paragraph, it says “(in this case, nuisance)”. What do you think it refers to?
To what relationship is vicarious liability applied to?
The adventure industry employs huge numbers of contract employees. Give two reasons why.
What is the difference between contract of service and contract for service?
What is a control test?
What other questions might the court ask after applying a control test?
The third paragraph has an interesting point. So does the case named Scurfield v. Cariboo Helicopter Skiing Ltd. What definitive statement can you make about court decisions having read the material?
Does the statement “John Smith is a contract employee of my company” hold up in court?