Understanding Torts Of Negligence And Misrepresentation In Business Law Is Crucial For Essay.

Legal Components of Torts of Negligence and Misrepresentation

Question:

Discuss about the Understanding Of The Law Environment.

It is a widely tacit verity that law cannot be violated not anybody can escape from its proceedings. Laws and regulation been made to cater justice to the victim that has been suffered from any such inappropriate act or event (Abraham 2017). This laws been enforced by the national government with an intention to afford righteousness to the public that would assist to build a healthier society with moral values and ethics for that matter. Considering such fact, business world is significant as every people are associated with it directly or indirectly irrespective of his or her nature of involvement. Similarly, business organisations around the globe need to adhere to the laws that are specific to the business proceedings as such. It is of vital importance that compliance to such business laws is an essential factor for the business firms in order to ensure a smooth flow of business activities effectively. However, there are complexities and issues present that hamper the proceedings negatively.

The main goal of this essay is to draw a clear and in-depth understanding of the law environment that business organisation chiefly operates. Besides that, by illustrating the real life scenarios of business world, it would assist in cater valuable understanding of the aspects that are associated with the issues and the possible solutions to overcome such discrepancies positively.

In this essay, comprise of coherent and clarified discussions, which helped to depict a justified conclusion that is value-based and effective in terms of understanding.

The legal components of the trots of negligence and a misrepresentation. Primarily, there are four legal components of the trots of negligence. Duty of care is owed, by a person or defendant to cater care and support to the plaintiff who is supposed to be served as per the duty of defendant. Causation is chiefly the negligence in providing effectual duty towards the consumers or the plaintiff may cause monetary loss, which is of severe damage and is a matter of consciousness. Breach of duty is the violation of duty; the plaintiff may face any sort of issue that has caused him/her massive harm. Thereby, the harm that caused him/her by means of negligence of duty or a breach, which is serious and damaging. Proximate damages indicate tort scenarios that create losses that cater monetary losses to the plaintiff negatively (Robinette et al. 2017). However, there are possibilities that justification is essential to prove that the defendant carries no fault from his end and case needs to studied in-depth.

Steps to Prove the Occurrence of Torts

On the other side, the legal components of a misrepresentation consist of three aspects. Misrepresentation of material is the possibilities that the defendant may make false promise or statement of truthiness in terms of contractual accord of business or material for that matter. Fraudulent misrepresentation can be identified as intentional tort that the person caters fraudulent presentation of an aspect that carries no truth and validity as such. The person might lie to the plaintiff in order to generate business and maximise profit. Impairment is concerned to the above two aspects, the plaintiff might get some serious amount of harm or injury from the defendant’s deceitful misrepresentation (Arlen 2017). In such events, the plaintiff may sue to the court of law with an intention to incur justice that would assist to recover the damages caused.

Steps to prove the occurrence.    There are several steps in order to prove that either has occurred. The torts of negligence create massive loss to any business organisation that might require heavy payback or a lawful liability (Wells 2017). For example, in a business scenario, an H.R manager carries the duty to provide every detail of an employee in order to ensure that he receives compensation, which is applicable to him. Yet, the negligence of duty in filling up the details precisely, the employee suffered with no compensation for a month that has incurred major loss to him. In such case, the employee could sue the H.R manager in tort of negligence and can charge legal liabilities by showing the breach of duty that the H.R manager has conducted negatively.

On the other hand, misrepresentation occurs when any person in a business state of affairs represents a false or untrue declaration to another person or customer that creates the possessions of encouragement to that particular person for that matter. For instance, a retailer caters false declaration to his customer regarding the quality of the product to be best and acquired high amount of price, yet after usage the quality is not up to the mark and considered to be of low quality. In this case, the customer can file a trot of misrepresentation and ask him for a penalty that affected him directly or indirectly (Heaton 2017). This sort of incidents are common in nature and can been seen often in real business scenarios. Post filing a lawsuit against the retailer to the court of law would assist him to provide justice for such inappropriate event.

Consequences to a Business Situation Concerning the Harm Caused

The above two torts that can be applied to real business situations. Analysing the two trots that been discussed above has catered significant understanding of the facts that usually take place within a business situation primarily. For case in point, a customer when visits a electrical appliance retail, he/she expects that the customer service personnel would greet and take them around to cater knowledge about the products and service that would be preferred by that particular customer. Yet, the personnel did not respond positively neither showed care for the customer to cater information about the interests that the customer carried in visiting the store. This clearly indicates the breach of duty as well as duty of care that refers to the tort of negligence. In such scenario, the customer can claim a tort of negligence to the court of law and sue the retail outlet as well as the organisation as well. However, he/she might settle down the issue with legal liabilities that the court would advise or order to the accuse party (Wright 2017).

Care that should to be taken when giving advice or directions to customers. Principally, in such situations that has been discussed above, there are several effective procedure that business organisation may take up in order to prevent such kind of discrepancies. In order to be effective in terms of providing care towards duty, the employer of business organisation need to stay focused towards his duties and responsibilities. He require gathering of knowledge concerning the duties and responsibilities that he is bound to deliver and uplifts the organisational efficiency to a newer level. The discussed instance of H.R manager’s tort of negligence, he needs to discuss with the employee regarding the error in person that has taken place in the mean time of their working period. Besides that, the H.R manager should settle down the issue by a rationale discussion with the organisational head concerning the recovery of harm that affected him negatively (Hall 2017). Although, the organisation could provide a slight uplift on his compensation that he could not draw due to the negligence of his H.R manager. This effectual strategy could assist in the settlement of occurred issue proficiently.

Whereas, in the case of tort of misrepresentation that has taken place within a retail outlet of television-manufacturing firm, the organisation need to take strategic step in order to prevent any harm that would create negative effect. Considering such factor, the organisation must communicate apology to the victim customer concerning the inconvenience that their customer had faced from their end and settle down the issue with free servicing along with a doorstep service delivery.  This strategic move would help the organisation to be at the safer side and avert to the torts arousal effectively (Cane 2017).

Defenses Available to Business

Consequences to a business situation concerning the harm caused. There are possibilities that organisations, which are fallen under torts of law, can get affected by negative consequences that would lead to incur major loss to the organisation as such. The cases of torts are unacceptable by the victim as well as by the public as a whole and thus, might create several consequences that would be negative in nature. Specific to the tort of negligence, the injured party could file a lawsuit to the court of law against the accused party in terms of breaching of duty of care (Goh and Yip 2017). This lawsuit can drag the accused party to the court of law in requisites of examining the case in detail and if found guilty, the court may charge demurrage to the accused party in justification of the filed case against him or the organisation as a whole.  

On the other hand, in context to the tort of misrepresentation the consequences can be more injurious as compared to the above-discussed tort. However, in this case the victim may sue the whole organisation to the court of law and may charge severe damage recovery that would satisfy the loss that is been faced by the victim.  

Defenses available to business where an individual claims loss as results of the actions of a business. There are primarily three defenses available to a business when a person claims to be impairment or injured in context to tort of negligence such as contributory negligence, supposition of risk and comparative blunder (Zipursky 2017). Considering such defense, a business organisation can defend in opposition to a negligence court case by claiming that duty of care was been exercised appropriately and may show evidences that would assist to prove that no harm or injury has been done to the plaintiff’s cause. Hiring a potential lawyer who is expert in handling such cases effectively would help the defendant from any lawsuit that would hamper his business negatively. In addition, by such available defenses the defendant as well as the lawyer could depend on one of the set of guidelines that would either eradicate or minimise the charges based on the assumed tort of negligence.

Real life instances of business are being liable for a tortious act. Torts of negligence as well as misrepresentation in a business scenario occur mostly in retail outlets, stores, consultancy firms and after sales service events. In specific, television-manufacturing companies’ claims to provide 100% after sales service to their product, however this statement is untrue and does not provide the same as claimed. When a customer faces issues post purchasing a television, he telephones the customer service executive and details him concerning the issue that he had face from the product. Yet, the executive does not show interest to his asked problem, puts him on hold, and caused him delay for a long time. This clearly makes understand a tort of misrepresentation of the promised quality service from the organisation’s end. In such case, the victim customer can sue the organisation against the tort of misrepresentation and can ask for recovery damage that has caused him harm negatively. Thereby, such torts can applied in any business situation that falls under the business law in order to prevent any harm to any person or party positively without any hesitation (Hershovitz 2017).

Real-Life Instances of Business Being Liable for a Tortious Act

Statutory authorities that protect the public’s interests. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) hold the statutory or the public authority to protect the public interests effectively concerning to their complaints and grievances. It enforces the public interests under the requirements of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010. The ACCC authority serves with an intention to advance the interests of the Australians for that matter (Accc.gov.au 2017). 

Affected consumer or public’s actions against the business and their expectation to gain from that action. Conversely, in context to torts of negligence and misrepresentation, the victim party can sue the business or the owner to the court of law. This can be done only when the court could found that it has created damage or harm to the other party negatively and require justice for the same. However, if the court of law failed or has not found any such cases that has harmed the victim then there is no such case to be claim to the court of law. Thereby, it is been understood that else, the matter has caused some serious harm to the plaintiff; the defendant is liable to charges under the court of law and if there is no such evidence of any harm then there is no such cases to be entertained (Henderson, Kysar and Pearson 2017).

Torts other than negligence and misrepresentation that is applicable to the actions of a business. There are three torts present other than negligence and misrepresentation, which are applicable to the actions of a business, and those are torts of computer system tampering, iniquitous competition and inappropriate interference (Fennell 2017). These torts are of serious in nature and can cause serious harm or loss to the plaintiff’s interests negatively.

Observations regarding the application of tort principles as they may apply in the business world. The policy of tort laws are unquestionably functions at a number of levels, which are across classified law, and at the personage tort level that indicates the severity of such laws to an extent. Moreover, in context to the tort of negligence and a misrepresentation, the defendant can simultaneously harm or injure the plaintiff negatively by means of false evidences as well as by stressing on the grounds of justification from the plaintiff’s point of view towards the matter (Tilley 2017). However, failure to identify the duty of care and the case of making false statement minimizes the liability and augments the severity of harm to the plaintiff. Thus, the court need to be concerned about both the parties and clarify justification based of factual evidences and grievance that to be produced before the court effectively.

This is to conclude that the law of tort is of vital importance that needs to noted in serious account and adherence to the regulations and laws are significant for that matter. On the other hand, it is of clear understanding that the causation of such harm or avoidance to such tort laws could cause severe damage to the business that may lead to business shutdown or deal with several negative proceedings. Therefore, the business regulatory environment comprise of diverse aspects that are important to adhere as well as acquiring such knowledge is of prime apprehension.

References

Abraham, K., 2017. The forms and functions of tort law. West Academic.

Accc.gov.au (2017). Compliance & enforcement policy. [online] Australian Competition and Consumer Commission. Available at: https://www.accc.gov.au/about-us/australian-competition-consumer-commission/compliance-enforcement-policy [Accessed 12 Sep. 2017].

Arlen, J., 2017. Economics of Tort Law. The Oxford Handbook of Law and Economics: Volume 2: Private and Commercial Law, p.41.

Cane, P., 2017. Key Ideas in Tort Law. Bloomsbury Publishing.

Fennell, L.A., 2017. Lumps and Lapses in Tort Law.

Goh, Y. and Yip, M., 2017. Concurrent Liability in Tort and Contract: An Analysis of Interplay, Intersection and Independence.

Hall, G.J., 2017. The Democratic Standard of Care in Tort Law.

Heaton, P., 2017. How Does Tort Law Affect Consumer Auto Insurance Costs?. Journal of Risk and Insurance, 84(2), pp.691-715.

Henderson, J.A., Kysar, D.A. and Pearson, R.N., 2017. The torts process. Wolters Kluwer Law & Business.

Hershovitz, S., 2017. The Search for a Grand Unified Theory of Tort Law.

Robinette, C., Coleman, J., Geistfeld, M., Goldberg, J.C., Perry, R., Sharkey, C., Witt, J. and Zipursky, B., 2017. JOuRNal Of TORT law.

Tilley, C.C., 2017. Tort Law Inside Out.

Wells, M.L., 2017. Harmonizing European Tort Law and the Comparative Method: Basic Questions of Tort Law from a Comparative Perspective.

Wright, J., 2017. Tort law and human rights. Bloomsbury Publishing.

Zipursky, B.C., 2017. Tort Theory in Copyright Law: Thinking about Patrick Goold's Unbundling the Tort of Copyright Infringement. Jotwell: J. Things We Like, p.137.