COMM 315 BUSINESS LAW AND ETHICS NOTES FOR FINAL EXAMINATION

Civil Code of Q e!e" M#$d#%e Article 2130 This is the definition of a mandate; a contract by which a person, the mandator, empowers another person, the mandatary, to represent him in the performance of a juridical act with a third person, and the mandatary, by his acceptance, binds himself to exercise the power. !.". #ayin" a real estate a"ent to sell your house $mandate% The principle & person who wishes to sell the house The a"ent & the person responsible for sellin" the house Third party & the house buyer Article 2132 Acceptance of a mandate may be express or tacit. Tacit acceptance may be inferred from the acts and e'en from the silence of the mandatary. A mandate may be written or 'erbal Article 2133 A mandate is either by "ratuitous title or by onerous title. A professional mandate is assumed to ha'e a price $price for ser'ice% A mandate entered by two natural persons is presumed to be by "ratuitous Article 213( )emuneration, if any, is determined by the contract, usa"e or law or on the basis of the 'alue of the ser'ices rendered. )emuneration is a synonym of payment Article 213* There are two types of mandates; special and "eneral. A special mandate implies a specific ser'ice $e.". sellin" my house%. +nce the mandate completed, it is o'er. A "eneral mandate implies a broad spectrum ser'ice $e.". ta,in" o'er my business for a period of time%. Article 213The powers of a mandatary $or a"ent% extend not only to what is expressed in the mandate, but also to anythin" that may be inferred therefrom. .n other words, all actions that are necessary to the fulfillment of the mandate are expected. Article 213/ #owers "ranted to persons to perform an act which is an ordinary part of their profession need not to be mentioned expressly.

000Article 2131000 A mandatary $or a"ent% is bound to fulfill the mandate he has accepted, and shall act with prudence and dili"ence in performin" it. 2e shall also act honestly and faithfully in the best interests of the mandator $or principle%, and a'oid placin" himself in a position that puts his own interest in conflict with that of his mandator $or principle%. The a"ent has a fiduciary duty and obli"ation; a duty of trust $all the trust is placed in the a"ent% Article 2133 4urin" the mandate, the mandatory is bound to inform the mandator $the principle%, at his re5uest or where circumstances warrant it, of the sta"e reached in the performance of the mandate. The mandatary shall inform the mandator without delay that he has fulfilled his mandate. .n other words, as soon as the mandate is completed, the a"ent must inform the principle. 000Article 21(0000 The mandatary is bound to fulfill the mandate in person unless he is authori6ed by the mandator to appoint another person to perform all or part of it in his place. .f the interests of the mandatory so re5uire, howe'er, the mandatary shall appoint a third person to replace him where unforeseen circumstances pre'ent him from fulfillin" the mandate and is unable to inform the mandatory thereof in due time. !.". .f . specifically choose a certain real estate a"ent and he7she appoints the mandate to another person that he7she chooses without informin" me, he7she is at fault. The chosen a"ent has to complete the mandate himself unless he7she is authori6ed by the mandator to do so or unless there is a special circumstance. !.". . as, you to return a boo, to the library for me, and you brea, your le" while runnin" to the library. 8ou as, your best friend to return it for you. This is acceptable because it is due to rare circumstances. 000Article 21(1 $9ery .mportant%000 The mandatory is accountable for the acts of the person he has appointed without authori6ation as his substitute as if he had performed them in person; where he was authori6ed to ma,e such an appointment, he is accountable only for the care with which he selected his substitute and "a'e him instructions. .n any case, the mandator has a direct action a"ainst the person appointed by the mandatary as his substitute. .n all cases, the a"ent is liable. 2owe'er, if the a"ent was authori6ed to appoint the mandate to another person, if he "a'e the substitute clear instructions, the a"ent has direct action a"ainst the person he appointed. :e mandataire r;pond, comme s<il les a'ait personnellement accomplis, des actes de la personne 5u<il s<est substitu;e, lors5u<il n<;tait pas autoris; = le faire; s<il ;tait autoris; = se substituer 5uel5u<un, il ne r;pond 5ue du soin a'ec le5uel il a choisi son substitut et lui a donn; ses instructions. Article 21(2 .n the performance of the mandate, the mandatary $or a"ent%, unless prohibited by the mandatory $or principle%, may re5uire the assistance of another person $assistance in the sense of help%. The mandatary remains liable towards the mandatory for the acts of the person helpin" him. Article 21(3

A mandatary who a"rees to represent, in the same act, persons whose interests conflict or could conflict shall so inform each of the mandators, unless he is exempted by usa"e or the fact that the mandators are already aware of the double mandate; he shall act neutrally towards each of them. >here a mandator was not in a position to ,now of the double mandate, he may ha'e the act of the mandatary declared null if he suffers injury as a result. Article 21(( >here se'eral mandataries are appointed in respect of the same business, the mandate has effect only if it is accepted by all of them. The mandataries shall act jointly for all acts contemplated in the mandate, unless otherwise stipulated or implied by the mandate. They are solidarily liable for the performance of their obli"ations. :ors5ue plusieurs mandataires sont nomm;s ensemble pour la m?me affaire, le mandat n<a d<effet 5ue s<il est accept; par tous. .ls doi'ent a"ir de concert 5uant = tous les actes 'is;s par le mandat, = moins d<une stipulation contraire ou 5ue cela ne d;coule implicitement du mandat. .ls sont tenus solidairement = l<ex;cution de leurs obli"ations. Article 21(* A mandatary who exercises alone powers that his mandate re5uires him to exercise with another person exceeds his powers, unless he exercises them more ad'anta"eously for the mandator than a"reed. 000Article 21(- $)emedy @ection%000 The mandatary may not use for his benefit any information he obtains or any property he is char"ed with recei'in" or administerin" in carryin" out his mandate, unless the mandator consents to such use or such use arises from the law or the mandate. .f the mandatory uses the property or information without authori6ation, he shall, in addition to the compensation for which he may be liable for injury suffered, compensate the mandator by payin", in the case of information, an amount e5ual to the enrichment he obtain, or in the case of property, an appropriate rent or the interest on the sums used. >hat a principle can "i'e an a"entA Bonfidential information #ropertyA !.". The new company for which you wor, relocated in Australia. 8ou as, your father to sell your house. 8our father sells his own house to mo'e into yours, but pretends that he is currently unable to sell your house due to low demand. Cecause you are away, you ha'e no idea of what is "oin" on. >hen you return, you find out e'erythin". 8our father has to reimburse you for rent that would ha'e otherwise been collected. DoneyA .f the a"ent uses your money to earn interests, you are entitled to those interests. 000Article 21(/000 The mandatory may not, e'en throu"h an intermediary, become a party to an act which he has a"reed to perform for his mandator, unless the mandator authori6es it or is aware of his 5uality as a contractin" party. +nly the mandator may a'ail himself of the nullity resultin" from the 'iolation of this rule. !.". 8ou as, your father to sell your house. 2e states that the mar,et is low, and that you can only obtain E200,000 $re"ular price was E3*0,000%. 2e did that in order to sell the house to your mother at a better price $he will also benefit from it since they would both be

li'in" in it%. @uch beha'iour from the mandatary is unacceptable and prohibited. The a"ent cannot become the third party. Article 21(1 >here the mandate is by "ratuitous title, the court may, after assessin" the extent of the mandataryFs liability, reduce the amount of dama"es for which he is liable. Article 21(3 The mandator is bound to cooperate with the mandatary to facilitate the fulfillment of the mandate. 000Article 21*0000 >here re5uired, the mandator ad'ances to the mandatary the necessary sums for the performance of the mandate. 2e reimburses the mandatary for any reasonable expense he has incurred and pays him the remuneration to which he is entitled. The principle $or mandator% must always reimburse the a"ent for his7her expenses, as lon" as they are reasonable and necessary for the fulfillment of the mandate. Article 21*1 The mandator owes interest on expense incurred by the mandatary in the performance of his mandate from the day they are disbursed. !.". Grom the moment that the a"ent puts "as in his7her car to fulfill the mandate, you pay interests. .nterest rate must always be expressed per year, not per month. 000Article 21*2000 The mandator is bound to dischar"e the mandatary from the obli"ations he has contracted towards third persons within the limits of the mandate. The mandator is not liable to the mandatary for any act which exceeds the limits of the mandate. 2e is fully liable, howe'er, if he ratifies such act or if the mandatary, at the time he acted, was unaware that the mandate was terminated. .f the a"ent completes the mandate ri"ht, the principal must dischar"e his7her obli"ations. The principle cannot sue the a"ent. .f the a"ent has not completed what the principle re5uired him to do, the principal is not re5uired to dischar"e him. The a"ent is, in such a case, liable. Article 21*3 The mandator is presumed to ha'e ratified an act which exceeds the limits of the mandate where the act has been performed more ad'anta"eously for him that he had indicated. 000Article 21*(000 >here the mandatary is not at fault, the mandator is bound to compensate him for any injury he has suffered by reason of the performance of the mandate. !.". if someone sexually harasses the a"ent while he is doin" an open house for your house, you must compensate him. 000Article 21**000 .f no fault is imputable to the mandatary, the sums owed to him are payable e'en thou"h the business has not been successfully concluded.

Cest effort & the a"ent does e'erythin" he is supposed to !.". .f your father does his best effort to sell your house but cannot due to poor mar,et demand, you must still pay him for his duties. Article 21*.f a mandate is "i'en by se'eral persons, their obli"ations towards the mandatary are solidary. This applies to se'eral people with a sin"le a"ent !.". your parents die and lea'e a house to you and your brothers, and you decide to sell it. .n this circumstance, a mandate $sellin" the house% is "i'en by se'eral persons $you and your brothers%. 000Article 21*/000 >here a mandatary binds himself, within the limits of his mandate, in the name and on behalf of the mandator, he is not personally liable to the third person with whom he contracts. The mandatary is liable to the third person if he acts in his own name, subject to any ri"hts the third person may ha'e a"ainst the mandator. !.". 8ou wish to sell your house for E2*0,000. The a"ent wants to ma,e a 5uic, sale, and sells your house for E200,000. Cefore si"nin" e'erythin", you find out that the a"ent was sellin" the house at a price for which you did not a"ree. 8ou cancel the sale. The third party is now extremely upset because he7she was told that he7she was "ettin" the house for E200,000. .n such a case, you must compensate the third party yourself. The mandatary is actin" on your behalf with the third party, which si"nifies that you are responsible to the third party for any action that the mandatary does wron". 000Article 21*3000 >here the mandatary a"rees with a third person to disclose the identity of his mandator within a fixed period and fails to do so, he is personally liable. The mandatary is also personally liable if he is bound to conceal the name of the mandator or if he ,nows that the person whose identity he discloses is insol'ent, is a minor or is under protecti'e super'ision and he fails to mention this fact. .f your house is sold to a third party, and the third party finds a hu"e crac, in the foundation, if the principleFs identity cannot be re'ealed, the third party can sue the a"ent. The principle would then pay bac, the a"ent for all lawsuit expenses and compensation to the third party. 2owe'er, if the a"ent is aware that the principle is insol'ent $has no money%, he must disclose it to the third party if he doesnFt want to "et sued. Article 21-0 A mandator is liable to third persons for the acts performed by the mandatary in the performance and within the limits of his mandate unless, under the a"reement or by 'irtue or usa"e, the mandatary alone is liable. The mandator is also liable for any acts which exceed the limits of the mandate, if he has ratified them. Article 21-1 The mandator may repudiate the acts of the person appointed by the mandatary as his substitute if he suffers any injury thereby, where the appointment was made without his authori6ation or where his interest or the circumstances did not warrant the appointment.

000Article 21-3 $Huaranteed in Test%000 A person who has allowed it to be belie'ed that a person was his mandatary is liable, as if he were his mandatary, to the third person who has contracted in "ood faith with the latter, unless, in circumstances in which the error was foreseeable, he has ta,en appropriate measures to pre'ent it. !.". Heor"es is your a"ent. 8ou are a company see,in" raw materials. Heor"es is in char"e of pic,in" up raw materials for you. 8ou decide to fire him. Heor"es "oes for one last trip to the supplier $after bein" fired% and "ets materials for himself. 8ou recei'e a bill 30 days later. 8ou are liable for this expense because you did not inform your suppliers that Heor"es was no lon"er with your company. Article 21-( A mandator is liable for any injury caused by the fault of the mandatary in the performance of his mandate unless he pro'es, where the mandatary was not his ser'ant, that he could not ha'e pre'ented the injury.

Civil Code of Q e!e" Co&'o&#%io$( Borporation & .ncorporated at the federal le'el Bompany & .ncorporated at the pro'incial le'el :e"al person & Borporation, company, partnershipI #atrimony & Assets, liabilities; basically a le"al personFs o'erall pac,a"e Article 301 :e"al persons ha'e full enjoyment of ci'il ri"hts. Article 302 !'ery le"al person has a patrimony. Article 303 :e"al persons ha'e capacity to exercise all their ri"hts. They ha'e no incapacities other than those which may result from their nature or from an express pro'ision of law. Article 30* !'ery le"al person has a name which is assi"ned to it when it is constituted, and under which it exercises its ri"hts and obli"ations. Article 30/ The domicile of a le"al person is at the place and address of its head office. Article 303

:e"al persons are distinct from their members. Their acts bind none but themsel'es, except as pro'ided by law. Q e!e" Co)'#$ie( A"% Li#!ili%* of Di&e"%o&( Article 113 1 The directors of the company should be solidarily liable to its employees for all debts not exceedin" six monthsF wa"es due for ser'ices rendered to the company whilst they are such directors respecti'ely. 2 Jo director shall be liable to an action therefore, unless a% the company is sued within one year after the debt became due and the writ of execution is returned unsatisfied, wholly or in part; or b% durin" such period, the windin" up order is made a"ainst the company or it becomes ban,rupt within the meanin" of Can,ruptcy and .nsol'ency Act and a claim for such debt is filed. .n other wordsA The directorFs patrimony may be at ris, if the director does somethin" wron". Gor example, if your company has not been payin" taxes, you $the director% will be personally held liable. They may sei6e your house, car, and more. !'en if another employee was in char"e of finances, you are held liable. .f you, the director, omit to pay employees for more than - months due to a financial crisis, employees can "o a"ainst you. .f a company declared more di'idends and can no lon"er pay its bills $insol'ent%, financial institutions or shareholders "o after directors. .f a company is unfairly tradin" shares, its director will be held liable. All in all, a companyFs director has more responsibilities than most people would thin,. They are liable for nearly e'erythin".

Civil Code of Q e!e" Co$%&#"%( Articles 13/1, 13/3, 1310, 1311, 1312, 1313, 131( Bontracts may be di'ided into specific types of contracts as followsA Bontracts of adhesion $not ne"otiable% Dutual a"reement $the parties ne"otiate and come to an a"reement% @ynalla"matic or bilateral contract $when obli"ations arise on both sides of the e5uation; for example, when sellin" my car, . ha'e the obli"ation to deli'er the car and the buyer has the obli"ation to pay me% Knilateral contract $when obli"ations only arise on one side; for example, ma,in" your will or ma,in" a donation% +nerous contract $by payin"% Hratuitous contract $for free%

Bommutati'e contract $,nowin" in ad'ance what your obli"ation will be on a specified date; for example, payin" E100 per bushels ordered in @eptember% Aleatory contract $when the extent of the obli"ations are not ,nown in ad'ance; for example, orderin" 100 bushels in @eptember at an uncertain price L the price will be determined once the season o'er, dependin" on how much was produced% .nstantaneous contract $once our obli"ations executed, the contract is done and o'er with% @uccessi'e contract $obli"ations are performed at se'eral different times; for example, a car lease% Bonsumer contract $a merchant sellin" a product or ser'ice to a consumer% Article 131* A contract is formed by the sole exchan"e of consents between persons ha'in" capacity to contract, unless, in addition, the law re5uires a particular form to be respected as a necessary condition of its formation, or unless the parties re5uire the contract to ta,e the form of a solemn a"reement. A contract does not necessarily ha'e to be written. Two people can enter a 'erbal a"reement, and still be 'alid. Article 131/ A contract if formed when and where acceptance is recei'ed by the offeror, re"ardless of the method of communication used, and e'en thou"h the parties ha'e a"reed to reser'e a"reement as to secondary terms. Bomponents of a contract that ma,e it 'alid $Huaranteed in !xam% 1+ Co$(e$% i% !rror $there are two types of errors L excusable 'ersus inexcusable, such as not readin" a contract properly; e.". of an excusable error & marryin" a man that you thou"ht to be a woman% ii% Graud $e.". misrepresentation of a product; a beautiful house that is said to be beach front is in fact in front of a polluted canal% iii% Gear $must conduct an objecti'e and subjecti'e test% i'% :esion $when one party has more power o'er the other and imposes the contract L if you are o'er 11 years old, you cannot use lesion as means of "ettin" out of a contract% ,+ C#'#"i%* i% A"e $!'eryone is allowed to contract for thin"s of minor 'alue for necessities of life. Dinors of 1( years old or more are entitled to contract for employment. 8ou ac5uire your full ri"ht to contract at 11 years old.% ii% #erson under re"ime of protecti'e super'ision $e.". if "randmother has Al6heimer, she has a restriction statin" that when wishin" to spend a sum of E*,000 or more, she needs a super'isor. #rotecti'e super'ision re5uires a court order to open up. At this point, she loses her ri"ht to contract% 3+ C# (e $>hen the reason for contract is a"ainst public order L such as prostitution, dru" sellin", "amblin", or death crimes L the contract is deemed as in'alid in court. 8ou cannot "o to court and as, for annulment of contract because the contract is deemed as 'oid.% -+ O!.e"% $the traditional nature of a contract L when sellin" a car, the object is a car; when leasin" a car, the object is the lease%

5+ Fo&) $@ome other re5uirement for a contract to be effecti'e. !'ery type of contract has a different form. Gor example, when mort"a"es are done, a notary must be present. A holo"raph will is the simplest form of will and is hand written. The latest one eliminates all other. Article 1(00 !rror 'itiates consent of the parties or of one of them where it relates to the nature of the contract, the object of the presentation or anythin" that was essential in determinin" that consent. An inexcusable error $such as not properly readin" the contract% does not constitute a defect of consent. Article 1(01 !rror on the part of one party induced by fraud committed by the other party or with his ,nowled"e 'itiates consent whene'er, but for that error, the party would not ha'e contracted, or would ha'e contracted on different terms. Graud may result from silence or concealment. !.". .f you are aware of a crac, in the foundation of a house you are sellin", remainin" silent about it is a form of fraud. 8ou ha'e the obli"ation to inform buyers of the problem. 000Article 1(0/ $Huaranteed in !xam%000 A person whose consent is 'itiated has the ri"ht to apply for annulment of the contract; in the case of error occasioned by fraud, of fear or of lesion, he may, in addition to annulment, also claim dama"es or, where he prefers that the contract be maintained, apply for a reduction of his obli"ation e5ui'alent to the dama"es he would be justified in claimin". !xampleA a man claims to be sellin" a beautiful beach front cotta"e in Glorida. Cecause you li'e in Banada, you trust his claim and purchase the cotta"e for E32*,000. +nce the contract concluded, you purchase plane tic,ets to "o 'isit your new house. Kpon arri'al, you reali6e that the house is o'erloo,in" a polluted canal full of alli"ators $fraud L misrepresentation of product%. .n this case, you do not want to annul the contract, as you are passionate about alli"ators. 8ou want to ,eep the house, but want a reduction in your obli"ations $EEE%. 4ue to the fact that the contract was based on fraud, you can as, for the contract to be maintained, while obtainin" a reduction in the obli"ation $i.e. price of house%. The house was not beach front, and thus has a lower 'alue. Bonsent based on error allows for cancellation but not dama"es, at it was your fault. There are two types of nullityA )elati'e nullity $cancellin" a contract or chan"in" it% Absolute nullity $no possibility of chan"in" the contract because the contract was ne'er formed or 'alid in the first place L e.". in'alid cause, such as prostitution contract% Article 1(11 A contract whose cause is prohibited by law or contrary to public order is null. Article 1(13 A contract whose object is prohibited by law or contrary to public order is null. Article 1(21 Knless the nature of the nullity is clearly indicated by the law, a contract which does not meet the necessary conditions of its formation is presumed to be relati'ely null.

Article 1(22 A contract that is null is deemed ne'er to ha'e existed. .n such a case, each party is bound to restore to the other the prestations he has recei'ed.

Civil Code of Q e!e" Civil Li#!ili%* Article 1(*/ This article pertains to the basis of ci'il liability. !5uation of ci'il liabilityA !ndowed with )eason M Gault M Bause M (rules of (direct and conduct: immediate) laws) 4ama"es & Bi'il :iability $4uty to )epair% (moodily, moral, and material)

!xampleA A pyrotechnician "i'es a firewor, show. At the end of the show, he finds a firewor, on the "round and decides to lea'e it there instead of pic,in" it up. A child finds it and brin"s it home to his father. 2is father li"hts up the firewor, and blows up his sonFs arm. .n this case, the father is responsible for the accident because he was the direct and immediate cause of the dama"e $i.e. arm loss%. Article 1(*1 This article pertains to contractual liability. !'ery person has a duty to honour his contractual underta,in"s. >here he fails in this duty, he is liable for any bodily, moral, or material injury he causes to the other contractin" party and is liable to reparation for the injury. !xampleA The balcony of an apartment buildin" falls while my friend and . are sittin" on it. . am a "uest at my friendFs apartment. . can sue for 1(*/ and my friend can sue for 1(*1. .n other words, the buildin" owner failed to pro'ide proper maintenance of the apartment buildin" and is ultimately responsible for my injuries $he is faulty, and the direct7immediate cause of my pain%. +n the other hand, my friend can sue for 1(*1 because he entered in a contractual a"reement with the buildin" owner. .n exchan"e for rent, the buildin" owner must pro'ide a safe apartment to my friend, but failed to do so.

Article 1(*3 A person ha'in" parental authority is liable to reparation for injury cause to another by the act or fault of the minor under his authority, unless he pro'es that he himself did not commit any fault with re"ard to the custody, super'ision, or education of the minor. A simple fault or accident still counts as a fault and you must pay for dama"es. 000Article 1(-0000

A person who, without ha'in" parental authority, is entrusted, by dele"ation or otherwise, with the custody, super'ision, or education of a minor is liable, in the same manner as the person ha'in" parental authority, to reparation for injury caused by the act or fault of the minor. >here he is actin" "ratuitously or for reward, howe'er, he is not liable unless it is pro'ed that he has committed a fault. Article 1(-1 Any person who, as tutor or curator or in any other 5uality, has custody of a person of full a"e who is not endowed with reason, is not liable to reparation for injury caused by any act of the person of full a"e, except where he is himself "uilty of a deliberate or "ross fault in exercisin" custody. !xampleA 8ou are in char"e of carin" for a mentally disabled person. 8our job is to brin" him7her for a stroll down the street e'ery day $'olunteer wor,%. +ne day, a car pulls o'er as,in" for directions. 8ou ta,e two brief seconds to help him. >hile you turned around to help the car dri'er, the disabled person wal,ed to a man and randomly hit him in the face. .n such a case, you are not faulty because you were helpin" someone. 2owe'er, if you start tal,in" to your best friend on your cell phone and omit to super'ise the disabled person, you will be held liable. 8ou did not perform your duty properly and carelessly left him7her alone. Article 1(-( An a"ent or ser'ant of the @tate or of a le"al person established in the public interest does not cease to act in the performance of his duties by the mere fact that he performs an act that is ille"al, unauthori6ed or outside his competence, or by the fact that he is actin" as a peace officer. .n other words, if a cop abuses you, the state or "o'ernment will be held liable. Article 1(-* A person entrusted with the custody of a thin" $or object% is liable to reparation for injury resultin" from the autonomous act of the thin", unless he pro'es that he is not at fault. Gor example, you dri'eway is 'ery steep. 8ou par, your manual car and omit to put the handbra,e. The car rolls bac, down the street and hurts a passer by. .n such a case, you are responsible for injuries caused by the car. Gor example, you ha'e a dead tree on your lawn. 8our nei"hbour tells you to cut it because it is dead, but you refuse to do so. 4urin" the ni"ht, the dead tree falls on your nei"hbourFs pool and brea,s it. 8ou are held liable for the dama"es caused by the dead tree.

Article 1(-The owner of an animal is liable to reparation for injury it has caused, whether the animal was under his custody or that a third person, or had strayed or escaped. A person ma,in" use $e.". ridin" a horse% of the animal is, to"ether with the owner, also liable durin" that time. Article 1(-/ The owner of an immo'able, without prejudice to his liability as custodian, is liable to reparation for injury caused by its ruin, e'en partial, where this has resulted from lac, of repair or from a defect of construction.

The owner of an apartment buildin" is liable if snow falls off the roof and harms a passer by. The owner of an apartment buildin" is liable if a balcony falls or any other type of dama"es caused by lac, of maintenance. Article 1(-1 The manufacturer is liable for any safety defect associated with its products. 8ou are also liable when importin" products or sellin" them $i.e. retailers%. Article 1(-3 A thin" $or product% has a safety defect where, ha'in" re"ard to all the circumstances, it does not afford the safety which a person is normally entitled to expect. !.". . purchase a toaster, and it ends up catchin" on fire. As a result, my entire ,itchen cau"ht on fire. A person does not normally expect a toaster to catch on fire. . can ultimately sue e'eryone in the chain $manufacturer, importer, and retailer%. All liable bodies should ha'e ,nown about the defect $that is how the court percei'es it%. .f a product does not ha'e the safety precaution picto"rams on it, it is deemed as a safety defect. @ufficient warnin" & warnin" of all attendant dan"ers $related to dan"ers ,nown to all%. !.". we all ,now that smo,in" around "as is dan"erous. >e all ,now that coffee is hot. Article 1(/0 A person may free himself from his liability for injury caused to another by pro'in" that the injury results from superior force, unless he has underta,en to ma,e reparation for it. A superior force is an unforeseeable and irresistible e'ent, includin" external causes with the same characteristics. !.". hurricane in Diami & foreseeable !.". hurricane in Dontreal & unforeseeable $'ery unli,ely% Article 1(/1 >here a person comes to the assistance of another person or, for an unselfish moti'e, disposes, free of char"e, of property for the benefit of another person, he is exempt from all liability for injury that may result from it, unless the injury is due to his intentional or "ross fault. Hood @amaritan L you sa'e a man from a heart attach but brea, one of his ribs while doin" B#); you will not be held liable >hen "i'in" away property to charity $e.". donatin" a toaster to the @al'a"e Army or to a friend and it blows up L you are not liable% Article 1(/2 A person may free himself from his liability for injury caused to another as a result of the disclosure of a trade secret by pro'in" that considerations of "eneral interest pre'ailed o'er ,eepin" the secret and, particularly, that its disclosure was justified for reasons of public health and safety. >histle blowin" L ,nowin" that your employer dumps toxic wastes in the ri'er and you inform public security. 000Article 1(/3000

The manufacturer, distributor, or supplier of a mo'able property is not liable to reparation for injury caused by a safety defect in the property if he pro'es that the 'ictim ,new and could ha'e ,nown of the defect, or could ha'e foreseen the injury. 9ictim ,new 9ictim could ha'e ,nown L there was sufficient indication on the product, but the 'ictim didnFt read it $e.". someone is a chemical en"ineer but didnFt foresee that mixin" two dan"erous chemicals could be harmful% 9ictim could ha'e percei'ed the injury $e.". when usin" a shot "un, you should not place your eye a"ainst the telescopic lens L you will "et a major blac, eye% 000Article 1(/( $Huaranteed in the Test%000 A person may not exclude or limit his liability for material injury caused to another throu"h an intentional or "ross fault; a "ross fault is a fault which shows "ross rec,lessness, "ross carelessness or "ross ne"li"ence. 2e may not in any way exclude or limit his liability for bodily or moral injury caused to another. !.". 8ou "o bunji jumpin". 2owe'er, the employee for"ot to wei"h you and put a ri"id cord that bro,e your le"s. 2e says that he is not responsible because you si"ned some papers before jumpin". .n this case, you can definitely sue. They are liable. Cecause this is an example of a simple fault $unintentional fault%, they are liable for moral and bodily dama"es, but not material, such as ripped jeans% 2owe'er if the fault is intentional, they would be liable for e'erythin" includin" material dama"es. Article 1(/* A notice, whether posted or not, stipulatin" the exclusion or limitation of the obli"ation to ma,e reparation for injury resultin" from the non performance of a contractual obli"ation has effect, in respect to the creditor, only if the party who in'o,es the notice pro'es that the other party was aware of its existence at the time the contract was formed. !.". #uttin" you jac,et in coat chec,. >hen pic,in" it up, it is destroyed. !'en thou"h there is a si"n indicatin" that the club is not liable, they are liable. They would ha'e to pro'e that you ,new about the si"n, which is too hard to pro'e. Article 1(/A person may not by way of a notice exclude or limit his obli"ation to ma,e reparation in respect of third persons; such a notice may, howe'er, constitute a warnin" of dan"er. !.". .f you post a warnin" about the fact that you ha'e a do" $Ceware of 4o"s%, and someone "ets bit on your property, you are still held liable. Article 1(/1 >here an injury has been caused by se'eral persons, liability is shared by them in proportion to the seriousness of the fault of each. The 'ictim is included in the apportionment when the injury is partly the effect of his own fault. This article pertains to contributory ne"li"ence L when the injury has been caused by many people. !.". >hen your own do" bites a passer by who was on your pri'ate property, both of you are at fault $you are *0N faulty, while the 'ictim is *0N faulty%.

!.". >hen your own do" bites a passer by, but a Obeware of do"P si"n is posted on the door and the 'ictim is on your pri'ate property, you are approximately 30N at fault while the 'ictim is /0N at fault. !.". >hen your do" bites an intruder who entered your house, you are 1N faulty, while the 'ictim who bro,e in is 33N faulty $in such a case, most 'ictims wouldnFt sue%. Article 1(/3 A person who is liable to reparation for an injury is not liable in respect of any a""ra'ation of the injury that the 'ictim could ha'e a'oided. !.". @omeone accidentally throws an elastic in your eye. 8ou wait ( wee,s before "oin" to the doctor when your eye is now a total mess. The person who threw the elastic is not liable for worst injuries because it could ha'e been a'oided. 2e7she would be liable for the immediate dama"es. Article 1(10 >here se'eral persons ha'e jointly ta,en part in a wron"ful act which has resulted in injury or ha'e committed separate faults each of which may ha'e caused the injury, and where it is impossible to determine, in either case, which of them actually caused it, they are solidarily liable for reparation thereof. !.". The capsules of a shot "un are the same no matter the type of shot "un used. 8ou and your friends are huntin", and are strate"ically placed on a huntin" line. A bird mo'es, and all shoot outside their huntin" 6one. +ne of your friends shoots you in the le". Cecause the bullet capsule cannot be identified, e'eryone is liable for "oin" outside their huntin" 6one. .t was so impulsi'e that it was impossible to identify the person who did it.

COMM 315 NOTES FOR FINAL EXAMINATION CASE ANAL/SIS

BA@! 1 L #.!B !@TAT! 9. BA.@@! 4FQB+J+D.! #+:+JA.@! GactsA 3 separate mandatesA 1. The niece was the li5uidator of the auntFs estate upon death 2. The nephew was in char"e of mana"in" the auntFs money and dealin" with the ban, 3. The ban, was in char"e of protectin" the auntFs money The aunt went for a strip to her nati'e #oland. 4urin" her trip, she passed away. >hen the niece learned about the death of her aunt, she be"an li5uidatin" her estate. At her "reat surprise, she reali6ed that her auntFs term deposit certificates of E2/,000 were withdrawn. The nephew, who learned about his auntFs death before e'eryone else, created a for"ed letter from his aunt instructin" the OCaisse Dconomie Polonaise du QubecP to pay her nephew the sum of E2/,000. The ban, accessed the auntFs term deposit certificates, turned them into cash, and "a'e them to the nephew. The plaintiff $the niece% is excessi'ely upset, and wishes to properly li5uidate her auntFs estate $the way she was as,ed to by her aunt%. The ban, should ha'e as,ed itself 5uestions because the redemption of the term deposit certificates in'ol'ed the renunciation of an important amount of accrued interest. Gurther in'esti"ation should ha'e been conducted. The court is of the opinion that a number of factors should ha'e alerted the ban, to the possibility that the nephew was exceedin" the mandate that the aunt had "i'en him. Gor these reasons, the Bourt condemns the ban, to pay the niece a sum of E2/,000 wit interest from the date of ser'ice. Article 2131 applies to this case L a mandatary $the ban,% is bound to fulfill the mandate he has accepted, and shall act with prudence and dili"ence in performin" it. BA@! 2 L 4). AJT2+J8 4+>!:: AJ4 J+TA)8 !4HA) 2A8 !::.@ GactsA Roseph had money, but a lot of debt. Roseph wishes to "o ban,rupt, but cannot do so because he has money to his name. Roseph decides to purchase an apartment buildin" under the name of 4r. Anthony 4owell, a person with whom he had pre'iously underta,en transactions such as this one. Cy purchasin" the apartment buildin", Roseph no lon"er has money. Roseph decides to mort"a"e the buildin" under 4r. Anthony 4owellFs name, but ta,es the cash proceeds from the mort"a"e of the buildin". 4r. Anthony 4owell is increasin"ly concerned by his participation in the scheme.

4r. Anthony 4owell became suspicious when he found that an amount held in trust for the maintenance of the property was ta,en by Roseph. After the papers si"ned, 4r. 4owell became the owner of the property incurred, and had substantially lar"e obli"ations toward innumerable third parties, such as the mort"a"e creditor, tenants, and municipal7school authorities. 4urin" the initial period, Roseph became the mandatary, and was in char"e of all day to day administration of the property. 4r. 4owell hired a notary $the defendant% to mana"e the propertyFs trust account, and ma,e sure that all che5ues were properly justified. The defendant was in char"e of ensurin" that all amounts ta,en by Roseph were put towards the maintenance of the property. .n other words, 4r. 4owell $the mandator% hired Jotary !d"ar 2ay !llis $mandatary% to ta,e care of the propertyFs trust account. .n this case, there are 2 mandates; one between 4r. 4owell and Roseph $administration of the property%, and one between 4r. 4owell and the notary $administration of the trust account aimed at co'erin" expenses associated with the maintenance of the property%. The mandate of interest in this case is the one between 4r. 4owell and the notary. Dany che5ues were used for purposes in no way related to the property. @ome che5ues had e'en disappeared. Article 1(*1 $from the Bi'il Bode of Suebec, Bi'il :iability% L !'ery person has a duty to honour his contractual underta,in"s. >here he fails in his duty, he is liable for any bodily, moral, or material injury he causes to the other contractin" party and is liable for reparation of the injury. Article 2130 $from the Bi'il Bode of Suebec, Dandates% L A mandatary is bound to fulfill the mandate he has accepted, and he shall act with prudence and dili"ence in performin" it. 2e shall also act honestly and faithfully in the best interests of the mandator. As a result, 4r. 4owell won the case. BA@! 3 L 1(-(00 BAJA4A .JB. 9!)@K@ J!T>+)T T)AJ@#+)T :T4. GactsA #laintiff & 1(-(00 Banada .nc. 4efendant & Jetwor, Transport :td. The plaintiff too, o'er the lease that Jetwor, Banada :td. had for a certain industrial property owned by Blarid"e #roperties :td. The offer to lease was si"ned by the president of Jetwor, Transport :imited, not on behalf of Jetwor, Transport :imited, but rather on behalf of its wholly owned subsidiary in Suebec. #rior to the expiry of the lease term, Jetwor, Transport :imited abandoned the leased premises without lea'in" the remainin" amount due in rent. >hen 1(-(00 Banada .nc. mo'ed in, there was a substantial amount still due in rent. The owner of Blarid"e #roperties :imited was now as,in" 1(-(00 Banada .nc. to co'er for the unpaid rent. Jetwor, Transport :imited refuses to pay the amounts claimed by 1(-(00 Banada .nc. Jetwor, Transport :imited claims not bein" responsible for the unpaid rent because the plaintiff was actually dealin" with the wholly owned subsidiary that is now closed.

2owe'er, the plaintiff claims to ha'e belie'ed that, at all times, it was dealin" with Jetwor, Transport :imited as a lessee. There was no e'idence of the contrary. The president of Jetwor, Transport :imited induced the lessor to belie'e that it was dealin" with the parent company rather than its subsidiary. Cy doin" so, the president committed a fraud, under Article 31/. Article 31/A .n no case may a le"al person $or company% set up juridical personality a"ainst a person in "ood faith if it is set up to dissemble fraud, abuse of ri"ht or contra'ention of a rule of public order. Althou"h Jetwor, Transport :imited and its subsidiary are two le"al entities, the Bourt retains the fact that their acti'ities are united. 1(-(00 Banada .nc. see,s a condemnation a"ainst the defendant for the total rent due, with interest, as well as additional indemnity contemplated by Article 1-13. Article 1-13A An indemnity may be added to the amount of dama"es awarded for any reason. BA@! ( L H.)+KU 9!)@K@ DA:.T GactsA Dr. Dali, sold his land to the plaintiff, Dr. Hiroux. Dr. Hiroux purchased the land in the hopes of buildin" a property. 2owe'er, when attemptin" to obtain construction permits, Dr. Hiroux realised that the soil on the land did not allow for a septic system and dwellin". Dr. Hiroux now claims that Dr. Dali, ,new about this problem since 1311, but did not say anythin" when the transaction too, place. The plaintiff is see,in" his money bac, and E10,000 in dama"es. Accordin" to Article 1(01, error induced by fraud $i.e. misrepresentation of property% 'itiates consent. Also, as stated in Article 1(01, fraud may result from silence or concealment. .n this case, Dr. Dali, remained silent and did not inform the purchaser of this major problem. 2owe'er, in his defence, Dr. Dali, claimed ha'in" told his real estate a"ent to inform buyers of the problem. The a"ent did not say anythin" to Dr. Hiroux. Dr. Dali, claims not bein" responsible for this occurrence as he did inform his a"ent. Accordin" to Article 21-0, a mandatory is also liable to third persons for the acts performed by the mandatary in the performance and within the limits of his mandate. The Bourt maintains that, "i'en the importance of the problem when purchasin" land, Dr. Dali, had the obli"ation to ensure that the messa"e was sent across from the mandatary to the third party. 2e had the responsibility to ensure that the buyer was fully aware of the problem. Jow, when the consent is 'itiated throu"h fraud resultin" from silence, the plaintiff can use Article 1(0/ $the plaintiff can either cancel the o'erall contract or chan"e it%. .n this case, the plaintiff cancelled the contract because he really needed a septic system to build a property. Dali, "ot his land bac,, and the plaintiff "ot his money bac, plus dama"es.

Article 1(13 $relati'e nullity% also applied to this case. A contract is relati'ely null where the condition of formation sanctioned by its nullity is necessary for the protection of an indi'idual interest, such as where the consent of the parties or of one of them is 'itiated. BA@! * L #!T!) 9!)@K@ G.A@B2! GactsA Dr. Giasche is the owner of a restaurant called OBhe6 HinoP. Dr. Giasche is a family friend of Dr. Hucciardo, husband of Drs. A"nes #eter Hucciardo. Dr. Hucciardo had lost his employment, and was see,in" a new job. Dr. Giasche proposed to sell his restaurant, and assured Dr. Hucciardo that it would be a "old mine. Dr. Giasche created false income statements depictin" hi"h net sales and profits. Dr. Giasche also told Dr. Hucciardo that he had a Ospecial wayP of reportin" income $i.e. tax e'asion%. 2owe'er, at that time, Dr. Hucciardo did not understand what Dr. Giasche meant by Ospecial way of reportin" incomeP. Dr. Giasche did not want to explain any further until Dr. Hucciardo "a'e a E100,000 deposit. Dr. Giasche ur"ed Dr. Hucciardo to re mort"a"e his house because numerous buyers were interested in the restaurant. Dr. Giasche told Dr. Hucciardo that if sales were low, he would reimburse him the total deposit. +nce the deposit "i'en, Dr. Hucciardo be"an runnin" the business. 2owe'er, sales were terrible and excessi'ely low. There was also a fre5uent presence of a tax auditor, which Dr. Giasche claimed to be simply 'erifyin" if the cash re"isters were wor,in" properly. Dr. Hucciardo be"an to understand what was "oin" on. 2e had been tric,ed into purchasin" the restaurant, and was runnin" a business that was a"ainst public order $tax e'asion%. Dr. Hucciardo as,ed Dr. Giasche to reimburse him the deposit. 2owe'er, Dr. Giasche refuses, and claims ne'er to ha'e said such a thin". Cecause the contractFs cause is fraud to "o'ernment, the contract is deemed as null $Article 1(11 L A contract whose cause is prohibited by law or contrary to public order is null%. Accordin" to the Bourt, it has ne'er existed and will not be reco"ni6ed $Article 1(22 L A contract that is null is deemed ne'er to ha'e existed%. At this 'ery point, the jud"e can either dismiss the case or jud"e in e5uity $this is to the jud"eFs discretion%. This case is clearly unfair. >hile the seller now has E100,000 in his poc,et alon" with the restaurant, the buyer has re mort"a"ed his house and has lost his money. >hen not ta,in" into consideration the unlawful cause of the contract, Dr. Giasche committed fraud by misrepresentin" the 'alue of the restaurant $i.e. false income statements%. Knder Article 1(01, error induced by fraud 'itiates consent. The jud"e ordered Dr. Giasche to "i'e bac, E100,000 to Dr. Hucciardo. 2owe'er, because of the contractFs unlawful cause, no dama"es were awarded. +ne must remember that when enterin" a contract with an unlawful cause, you are ta,in" a "reat ris, because the jud"e may not want to parta,e in the case.

Article 1(11 also applies to this case $absolute nullity%. BA@! - L BA))!G+K) :AJH!:.!) 9!)@K@ B.J!#:!U +4!+J GactsA 2 contracts are present in this case; one between Barrefour :an"elier and Bineplex +deon, and one between Bineplex +deon and Hu66o. Barrefour :an"elier built and leased a cinema complex to Bineplex +deon. 2owe'er, before Bineplex +deon mo'ed in, it decided to sublease the complex to Hu66o. The landlord is upset, and does not want a Hu66o mo'ie theatre in Barrefour :an"elier. The landlord states to ha'e promised all the stores and customers that a Bineplex +deon would be built. Bineplex +deon promises that Hu66o will be operatin" under the appearance of a Bineplex +deon. The landlord ma,es them si"n contracts statin" that Hu66o shall operate under BineplexFs banners, and that Bineplex +deon would boo, all mo'ies shown at the cinema for Hu66o. After a year of operation, Hu66o remo'es all Bineplex banners, and installs Hu66o si"ns e'erywhere. The landlord is upset and sues. .n its defence, Hu66o appears for Articles 1(01, 1(02, 1(03, and 1(0(. Hu66o states that Barrefour :an"elier made it si"n a"reements by tellin" Hu66o that it had already promised other tenants and customers that a Bineplex +deon would be built. Accordin" to Hu66o, such assertions were false and consisted of a misrepresentation $Article 1(01%. Hu66o also states that it si"ned the a"reements by fear of losin" business $Article 1(02%. Hu66o stated that Bineplex +deon is a lar"e competitor, and that refusin" to si"n could start a conflict $Article 1(03%. Hu66o also appeared for Article 1(0(, statin" that it was a 'ictim of lesion. Jow, accordin" to the Bourt, none of the articles pertain to this case. Gor example, lesion solely applies to cases in'ol'in" minors or people under a re"ime of protection. As stated in Article 1(0*, lesion 'itiates consent only in respect of minors and persons of full a"e under protecti'e super'ision. The Bourt also maintained that Hu66oFs fear of losin" business is not a fear lar"e enou"h to apply to Article 1(02. The jud"e claims that Hu66o had a subjecti'e fear that all other entrepreneurs ha'e. 2e rejected the use of Article 1(02. Also, the landlordFs claim to ha'e promised tenants and customers that a Bineplex +deon would be build does not constitute misrepresentation under Article 1(01. )e"ardin" Barrefour :an"elier, the landlord wants the a"reement contract to be in effect under a specific performance obli"ation. 2e wants Hu66o to operate under a Bineplex +deon. The jud"e orders Hu66o to operate under a Bineplex +deon $under a specific performance obli"ation%. ( cases which do not allow for a specific performance obli"ationA

>hen the obli"ation has become impossible to perform $you can "et your money bac, plus dama"es, but not a specific performance obli"ation% >hen the time in which to perform the obli"ation has elapsed $!.". you pay Beline 4ion to sin" at the Cell Benter on Ranuary 1st 2003, at /pm. 2owe'er, the time has elapsed because she missed a plane and didnFt show up. 8ou can "et your money bac, plus dama"es, but cannot obtain a specific performance obli"ation% >hen property has perished $e.". an import7export ship sin,s% >hen property has left the patrimony $e.". you send the description and price of a car you are tryin" to sell to #erson C. Cy the time #erson C replies, you sold the car to #erson B. The car is no lon"er in your patrimony. Therefore, #erson C can obtain dama"es, but not a specific performance% 000 .n this case, the lease under Bineplex +deon is not impossible to perform, the time in which to perform the lease has not elapsed, the property has not perished, and the property has not left the patrimony. Therefore, the landlord can force Hu66o to operate under Bineplex +deon $under a specific performance obli"ation%. BA@! / L B+#.@B+#! .JB. AJ4 T)D B+#8 B!JT!)@ GactsA TD) Bopy $plaintiff% is in the business of offerin" photocopy ser'ices to the public by means of photocopy machines which are placed in stores carryin" on business operations of another nature, such as con'enience stores and pharmacies. TD) Bopy installed its photocopy machines in approximately /00 business locations. Cefore installin" its photocopy machine in a store, a contract was to be si"ned by the business operator. A non competition co'enant was present and stated that the business operator may not deal directly or indirectly with anyone or any company connected with the business of ma,in" photocopy e5uipment a'ailable for use by the public for a period of 1 year, within a 2* mile radius from the business location. Bopiscope $defendant% is also in the photocopy business. .n 133/, it embar,ed on a pro"ram aimed at persuadin" business operators to terminate their contract with TDB Bopy and enter into an a"reement with Bopiscope. TD) Bopy sues Bopiscope for an interlocutory injunction in order to stop Bopiscope from ta,in" o'er its business. TD) Bopy insisted that the non competition co'enant was used to protect the companyFs trade secrets. The Bourt concluded that the non competition co'enant was manifestly unreasonable and therefore in'alid. .t follows that the respondent has not established an apparent ri"ht $or clear ri"ht%, which is necessary for the "rantin" of an interlocutory injunction. There is also no e'idence that the business operator has ,nowled"e of any trade secrets. .ts sole role is that of ascertainin" that the machine has a supply of paper and in, and collectin" the fee for its use. Also, the contract si"ned by business operators to TD) Bopy was a contract of adhesion $Article 13/3 L a fixed contract with no ne"otiation%. BA@! 1 L 2A)).@ 9!)@K@ +@T)+D+H.:@T.

GactsA #laintiff & Dr. 2arris 4efendant & Dr. +stromo"ils,i The plaintiff had been leasin" a taxi cab from the defendantFs wife. !'ery wee,, the plaintiff would "o to the defendantFs house to settle his accounts and "i'e royalties. +ne day, the plaintiff went to the defendantFs house to settle his accounts. 2owe'er, the past wee, had been relati'ely 5uiet and Dr. 2arris did not collect much money. The defendant "ot 'ery upset, and se'erely harmed the plaintiff. 2e beat him up. .n his defence, the defendant stated that Dr. 2arris simply fell hard on the way out. +n the other hand, Dr. 2arris stated that the defendant beat him up se'erely. >hich scenario is more plausibleV Accordin" to the jud"es, the plaintiffFs story is more li,ely to ha'e occurred. A test was conducted to assess the defendantFs ci'il liability. The defendant is at fault, he is the direct7immediate cause of the dama"es, and the dama"es he inflicted on the plaintiff are moral, bodily, and material. 2ence, there is a ci'il liability under Article 1(*/. Knder Article 1-21, where the awardin" of puniti'e dama"es is pro'ided by law, the amount of such dama"es may not exceed what is sufficient to fulfill their pre'enti'e purposes. The defendant had two trials; a ci'il trial and a criminal trial. .n the criminal trial, the defendant was found "uilty, and had to do jail time. .n the ci'il case, the defendant had to pro'ide compensatory dama"es $moral, bodily, material% to the 'ictim. There was a re5uest for puniti'e dama"es. 2owe'er, these dama"es were refused as one cannot be punished twice for the same assault $i.e. jail time%. BA@! 3 L >A:T!) 9!)@K@ @.JH!) GactsA This case pertains to the story of a brief relationship between a man, Dr. >al,er, and a woman, Drs. @in"er. They fell in lo'e, and mo'ed in the same buildin". !ach had a separate apartment. Drs. @in"er "ot pre"nant, and went to a clinic to "et an abortion. Their relationship was still 'ery recent. Drs. @in"er "ot immensely frustrated by this unfortunate occurrence, and entered Dr. >al,erFs apartment to destroy his clothes. Dr. >al,er also saw her lea'in" that day with a lar"e suitcase. @he was ,ic,ed out of the apartment buildin" by the owner. >hen Dr. >al,er entered his apartment, he reali6ed that numerous pieces of his wardrobe and personal belon"in"s were missin". 2e reported the incident to the nearest police station. @oon after, Drs. @in"er learned about the complaint filed by Dr. >al,er, and decided to file a complaint of her own on sexual assault a"ainst Dr. >al,er. .n Bourt, the jud"e did not belie'e a sin"le word from Drs. @in"er. 2er interpretation of e'ents was extremely conflictin" and confusin". Drs. @in"erFs attorney ur"ed her to drop the char"es a"ainst Dr. >al,er.

The Bourt concluded that she fabricated the sexual assault story in order to "et e'en with Dr. >al,er. Jow, to say that a person has committed sexual assault when it is not true is a serious attach to his reputation and sense of di"nity. Dr. >al,er sues for dama"es to reputation, di"nity, stress, and incon'enience, under Article 1(*/. Article 1(*/ L !'ery person has a duty to abide by the rules of conduct which lie upon him so as not to cause injury to another. >here he is endowed with reason and fails in his duty, he is responsible for any injury, whether it be bodily, moral or material in nature. Dr. >al,er is awarded compensation for moral dama"es. Jow, Dr. >al,er re5uests puniti'e dama"es, which he is awarded. BA@! 10 L GA)DAT.@ 9!)@K@ BAJA4.AJ T.)! B+)#+)AT.+J GactsA #laintiff & Dr. Garma,is Dr. Garma,is is *( years old, and purchased a step ladder to wor, on his retirement home in Hreece. 2e purchased the ladder at Banadian Tire in +ntario, and "ot it shipped to Hreece. Accordin" to the plaintiff, the ladder was safely pac,a"ed in rubber, plastic, and cardboard. >hen the ladder arri'ed in Hreece, Dr. Garma,is be"an wor,in" on his retirement home. >hile he was standin" on the third step of the ladder $out of fi'e steps in total%, he lost his balance, and the ladder collapsed. The plaintiff bro,e his an,le and hill. The plaintiff decides to sue based on the fact that he was not ade5uately warned concernin" the use and ris,s associated with the ladder. Dr. Garma,is came bac, to Banada in order to recei'e medical attention. 1 year W later, he as,ed his wife to ship bac, the ladder. The plaintiff "ot the ladder tested by a professional en"ineer, who concluded that the ladder must ha'e had a pre purchase defect. 2owe'er, another s,illed en"ineerin" doctor was brou"ht to Bourt. 2e testified that the ladder in issue met all industry standards and, under normal use, could not ha'e failed in the manner su""ested by the plaintiff. The Bourt found that it is nearly impossible to determine whether dama"e to the ladder was done before the purchase or after, say durin" the transportation to Hreece. Also, Dr. Garma,is did not see the ladder for 1 W years after his return to Banada. The ladder has made two cross Atlantic trips before it was seen by an expert. Dr. Garma,isFs expert finally a"rees with the Bourt, but now ar"ues that there was insufficient si"na"e on the ladder itself. 2owe'er, it was found that the ladder did contain proper si"na"e, but that Dr. Garma,is remo'ed them before usin" it. The Bourt ultimately concluded that Dr. Garma,is ,new or could ha'e ,nown of the potential defect $Article 1(/3 L the manufacturer of a mo'able property is not liable to reparation for injury caused by a safety defect if he pro'es that the 'ictim ,new or could ha'e ,nown of the defect%. 2ence, Dr. Garma,is lost the case.

BA@! 11 L >A:G+)4 9!)@K@ RABKXX. GactsA >alford purchased a ( foot pool $'ery shallow%. >alford also purchased a 10 foot slide $possible dan"er%. Drs. >alford told her dau"hter not to slide head first $warned her dau"hter of possible dan"ers%. The dau"hter was 1- years old at the time, and decided not to listen to her mother and slid down head first. @he bro,e her nec,. Drs. >alford sues Racu66i for improper si"na"e on the slide. @he ar"ues that there were insufficient warnin"s. 2owe'er, the Bourt found that Racu66i was not the immediate and direct cause of her dau"hterFs injury. The actual cause of the accident was >alfordFs failure to heed her motherFs warnin"s. Also, the Bourt concluded that the dau"hter and mother should ha'e ,nown or foreseen the injury $Article 1(/3 L a manufacturer is not liable to reparation for injury caused by a safety defect if he pro'es that the 'ictim ,new or could ha'e foreseen the injury%. The Bourt concluded that Racu66i should build more prominent, durable, and detailed warnin"s pertainin" to the use of water slides. 2owe'er, there was no causal connection between an illustration on the co'er of the pool or slide and the injuries sustained by the plaintiff. BA@! 12 L D+)@! 9!)@K@ B+TT C!9!)AH!@ >!@T :T4 GactsA Bott Ce'era"es .nc. produces sodas. Tami Dorse $plaintiff% purchases a two litre bottle of pop. @he is unable to turn the metal twist off cap, and decides to use a nutcrac,er to "et a better "rip. As she started the turnin" motion, she heard a poppin" noise and the cap hit her strai"ht in the eye. @he suffered numerous injuries to her ri"ht eye. @he sues Bott Ce'era"es .nc. @he hires a lawyer, and he "oes to loo, at the machine used to cap the bottles. The machine is said to cap at different pound le'els. The manufacturer of the cappin" machine, Aluminum Bompany of America, pro'ided Bott Ce'era"es :td. with a manual on how to properly use the machine. .n the manual, it is stated that soda manufacturers should not cap passed a 1* pound pressure. The manual clearly states that Oany improperly adjusted or maintained capper can cause improper closure application, resultin" in sudden closure ejection and serious injury, often to the eyeP. The manual also stated that Ohi"h tor5ue may lead the consumer to use a tool or de'ice to aid in remo'in" the closureP. Bott Ce'era"es .nc. ultimately decided to cap at a 13 pound pressure $within limits%. 2owe'er, the company reali6ed that this pressure was insufficient because numerous caps were comin" off durin" transportation to retailers.

Bott Ce'era"es .nc. decided to cap at a 20 pound pressure $hi"hly abo'e su""ested limit%. As a result, Bott Ce'era"es .nc. is the immediate and direct cause of the injury. Knder Article 1(-3, a thin" has a safety defect where it does not afford the safety which a person is normally entitled to expect $you do not expect a bottle cap to pop li,e it did%. Also, under Article 1(-1, the manufacturer is liable to reparation for injury caused to a third person by reason of a safety defect in the thin" $it is the immediate cause of the injury%. Knder Article 1(*/, e'ery person $includin" companies% has a duty to abide by the rules of conduct so as not to cause injury to another. >here he is endowed with reason and fails in his duty, he is responsible for any injury he causes to another person by such fault and is liable to reparation for the injury, whether it be bodily, moral or material in nature. Therefore, Bott Ce'era"es .nc. must pro'ide the plaintiff with compensatory dama"es. Also, because Bott Ce'era"es .nc.Fs fault was intentional $i.e. the company was aware of the possible injuries resultin" from increasin" the cappin" pressure%, the plaintiff is entitled to puniti'e dama"es.