Assignment 1
- Exception clause (“The Hotel Management, takes no responsibility for any mistakes, made by us or by our staff, howsoever caused, both in contract and tort”)
- Innkeepers Act section 3 & 5 (statuary law) (applicable to all hotels in Singapore) will be relevant for the diamond ring issue
- Unfair contract terms act 1977 (page 52) (but google section 2 and 3)
- Some of the issues are in the contract and the others are in tort
- Both use the IRAC formula
- Unliquidated damage
- First, find how many people are there:
1. Hotel
2. Daniel
3. Mary
4. Shirley (infant)
5. Parents (McAlisters)
- Losses:
1. Diamond ring
2. Loss of profits
3. Emotional loss or injured feeling
4. Reputation loss
5. Medical expenses
Issues of Tort:
Losses:
1. Emotional loss or injured feeling
2. Loss of reputation
1st issue: can Daniel recover 1 million for the loss he suffers from the hotel
2nd issue: if he can claim for the loss of the ring from the hotel, how much can he claim (look at the innkeeper’s act)?
3rd issue: is the hotel responsible for the mistake committed by the employee i.e. Mary
4th issue: can the hotel rely on the exemption clauses as a defense against the claim by Daniel
5th issue: can Daniel claim the sum of 560,000 i.e. loss of profit against the hotel for the aborted contracts which he had with third parties
6th issue: is Daniel claim for damages of 560,000 too remote i.e. is it too far away (pg. 115) 7th issue: can daniel claim his emotional losses from the hotel? (can daniel claim his loss of reputation from the hotel) {thoughts}
8th: can shierly sue daniel for the losses (emotional loss and medical expenses) 9th: can she sue the hotel/ can she sue because she is an infant?
10th: can the parents sue the hotel or daniel for Sherly’s lost
11th: the unfair contract act, the applicable between daniel and the hotel 12th: if daniel cant claims all the money, what can he claim?
For the hotel to be responsible, there must be 3 rules that Daniel must prove:
1st issue
1. The exist of the relationship between employer and employee (Mary is an employee
of the hotel)
2. Mary must have committed a tort
3. Mary committed a tort in the course of employment
4. Is the hotel vicariously liable for the act of mary?
2nd issues
What are the defences available for hotel 24