Business Law.

How to Answer legal Questions – IRAC

1.    Issue 1. – Does D Owe Duty of Care to P?

2. Rule(s)

a.    The Main Test – (Under Common Law):

Was it Reasonably Foreseeable by the Defendant that his conduct could harm someone in the Plaintiff’s Position?

Case Authority – Donaghue v Stevenson;
Case Authority – Grant v Australian Knitting Mills

b.    The Secondary Test – (Under Common Law):
Was the Plaintiff in a ‘Vulnerable Position and under the Defendant’s Control?

c. Under Statute – ‘Occupiers Liability Act (Vic)…
Occupier’s Liability – applies to anyone occupying land as owner or tenant..
–     Occupiers of land have the same level of care to different classes of entrants.
–    Occupiers Must avoid reasonably foreseeable risk of injury to all entrants (including  trespassers).
–    Hacksaw v Shaw, p 103;
–    Australian Safeways Stores v Zaluzna (1986), p 103.
3.    Application – Rule to the Facts –
a.    In this case….the Plaintiff (Bruce)  can show it was reasonably foreseeable that defendant’s (Classic and Michael’s) conduct could harm someone in plaintiff’s (Bruce’s) position as a Visitor.
b.    Vulnerability and Control…. In this case…. the Plaintiff (Bruce)  was in control…and Bruce was vulnerable
c.    Under Occ.Liab.Act –D owes P duty of care