Chapter 5: Land Ownership and Tort Liability Flashcards
Mandy and Chris recently purchased a small two bedroom house that backed onto a small plastics manufacturing plant. They began renovating the house the moment they moved in and by the end of March, they had finished putting in a garden, complete with a little terrace for dining outdoors and a garden of rose bushes. In May, just as the weather was warming and Mandy and Chris were starting to enjoy their suppers outdoors, the plastics plant began to vent steam mixed with gases that resulted from the plastic manufacturing process. The venting took place every evening at 5 o’clock, just as Mandy and Chris were arriving home from work. Because the small is so unpleasant, Mandy and Chris are no longer able to eat their supper outdoors, and the rose bushes have started to wilt and die.
Which of the following actions is available to Mandy and Chris?
1.) Trespass by wrongful placing
2.) Private nuisance
3.) Public nuisance
4.) None of the above
2.) Private nuisance
Mandy and Chris recently purchased a small two bedroom house that backed onto a small plastics manufacturing plant. They began renovating the house the moment they moved in and by the end of March, they had finished putting in a garden, complete with a little terrace for dining outdoors and a garden of rose bushes. In May, just as the weather was warming and Mandy and Chris were starting to enjoy their suppers outdoors, the plastics plant began to vent steam mixed with gases that resulted from the plastic manufacturing process. The venting took place every evening at 5 o’clock, just as Mandy and Chris were arriving home from work. Because the small is so unpleasant, Mandy and Chris are no longer able to eat their supper outdoors, and the rose bushes have started to wilt and die.
Which of the following would be a valid defense for the plastics plant?
1.) The plant uses the most sophisticated equipment to prevent the emission of noxious gases.
2.) The plan has operated in this location for the past ten years; Mandy and Chris knew that when they moved into the area.
3.) The present location of the plant is the only industrial area of town.
4.) None of the above are valid defenses.
4.) None of the above are valid defenses.
Mandy and Chris recently purchased a small two bedroom house that backed onto a small plastics manufacturing plant. They began renovating the house the moment they moved in and by the end of March, they had finished putting in a garden, complete with a little terrace for dining outdoors and a garden of rose bushes. In May, just as the weather was warming and Mandy and Chris were starting to enjoy their suppers outdoors, the plastics plant began to vent steam mixed with gases that resulted from the plastic manufacturing process. The venting took place every evening at 5 o’clock, just as Mandy and Chris were arriving home from work. Because the small is so unpleasant, Mandy and Chris are no longer able to eat their supper outdoors, and the rose bushes have started to wilt and die.
If the rose bushes were not affected by the emissions from the plastics plant, which of the following statements would be TRUE?
1.) Mandy and Chris will have to show that the interference with their use and enjoyment of the land is not trifling.
2.) The plastics plant will be able to rely on the defense of volenti non fit injuria.
3.) Mandy and Chris will be able to recover damages regardless of any defenses the plastics plant may raise.
4.) Mandy and Chris will have to show that the interference with their use and enjoyment is not too remote in law.
1.) Mandy and Chris will have to show that the interference with their use and enjoyment of the land is not trifling.
Which of the following is NOT a remedy available for private nuisance?
1.) Abatement
2.) Self-Help
3.) Damages
4.) Injunction
2.) Self-Help
Arthur, an employee of Accurate Delivery Service, misread the street address and delivered some parcels to Bob’s house, rather than to Carol’s house on the opposite side of the street. He left the parcels near the back steps leading to the basement door of the house. Late that evening Bob arrived home, fell over the boxes and down the steps. Who of the following could Bob successfully sue for damages?
1.) Carol
2.) Arthur
3.) Accurate Delivery Services
4.) Both Arthur and Accurate Delivery Services
4.) Both Arthur and Accurate Delivery Services
Which of the following statements is FALSE?
1.) Under most provinces’ Occupiers Liability legislation, an “occupier” is defined only as a person who is in physical possession of premises.
2.) Under common law, children are owed a greater duty of care than are trespassers.
3.) The common law distinction between an invitee and a licensee may no longer exist under provincial Occupiers Liability legislation.
4.) The Occupiers Liability legislation tends to expand the number of people who can be liable as occupiers.
1.) Under most provinces’ Occupiers Liability legislation, an “occupier” is defined only as a person who is in physical possession of premises.
Each of the following situations involves a trespass. However, a valid defense is available to some of the trespassers. Which of the following acts would NOT have a valid defense?
A. Jillian is a tenant in a shopping centre of which Marnie is the property manager. One Saturday evening, Marnie gets a call from the fire department stating that the sprinkler system has malfunctioning in Jillian’s store. Marnie and the fire department enter the store, shut down the sprinkler system and correct the problem.
B. Roseanne is the owner of a commercial building which she rents to various tenants. Leon is one of those tenants. Leon has not paid rent for the month so Roseanne enters his store and seizes a number of items of inventory to sell to pay the rent owing.
C. Mark is a vacuum cleaner salesperson. He is going door to door trying to interest people in his product. He approaches Devon’s property which is surrounded by an eight foot chain link fence. The gate to the property is clearly marked with a “DO NOT ENTER” sign. Desperate for a sale, Mark enters anyways.
1.) A and B only
2.) B and C only
3.) A only
4.) C only
4.) C only
Dermot owns a flower shop and his deliveries are made by his employee, Gus. While picking up fish and chips to take home for his evening meal, Gus fell asleep at the wheel of his fan and injured Molly. Which of the followings statements correctly describes a course of action that will likely be successful for Molly?
1.) Molly can sue Gus for nuisance.
2.) Molly can sue Dermot for Gus’ negligence under the principle of vicarious liability.
3.) Molly can sue only Gus in negligence because the accident occurred when Gus was doing something outside the ordinary scope of his employment.
4.) Molly cannot sue anyone.
3.) Molly can sue only Gus in negligence because the accident occurred when Gus was doing something outside the ordinary scope of his employment.
Nick and Nora Charles live in a house adjacent to a golf course. Their backyard is regularly bombarded with golf balls to the point that they and their dog, Asta, cannot use it safely. The golf balls have never hit the house or broken any windows. The golf course was purchased by new owners last year who have changed it from a private to a public course Since then the situation has become worse because the new owners, the Thinmans, do not warn golfers about the proximity of the Charles’ house. Also, golfers have taken to entering the Charles’ yard to retrieve their balls to the extent that part of the Charles’ yew hedge has been damaged. Which of the following statements is TRUE?
A. Nick and Nora will have a successful action against the Thinmans in trespass, private nuisance and strict liability.
B. In order to recover under the action of trespass, Nick and Nora must show that they have sustained actual damage.
C. The action of strict liability applies because the Thinmans have brought golf balls onto the property, a non-natural use, which are likely to do damage if they escape.
D. In order to recover under the tort of private nuisance, Nick and Nora must show that their property has sustained physical damage.
1.) All of the above are true.
2.) A and C only
3.) B and D only
4.) None of the above area true.
4.) None of the above area true.
Frank was a rancher and a fan of “Armageddon” movies who feared that the world was going to come to an end very soon, and that only those who had provisions to last for 6 months would survive. He built a special lead-lined bunker on his property and proceeded to stock up with all things necessary to support life after the final war. To supply his family’s energy needs, Frank constructed a huge underground tank to store oil. Some months later Frank’s tank sprang a leak and leaked out into the irrigation system of his neighbour, Herb. Herb’s crops were contaminated and most of his livestock was killed. Which of the following would be an appropriate tort action in which Herb can sue Frank?
1.) Occupiers liability, because Frank was responsible for the safety of all things on his property.
2.) Trespass, because Frank caused “wrongful leaving” of the oil on Herb’s property.
3.) Vicarious liability, because Frank is responsible for the acts of objects within his control.
4.) Strict liability, because Frank brought onto his property a non-natural substance which was likely to cause damage if it escaped.
4.) Strict liability, because Frank brought onto his property a non-natural substance which was likely to cause damage if it escaped.
Strict liability, or the rule in Rylands v. Fletcher, does permit some limited defenses. Which of the following would be a good defense against an action based upon strict liability?
1.) The defendant can show that the escape which caused the loss was caused by someone over whom the defendant had no control.
2.) The defendant can show that the escape occurred through no negligence on its part.
3.) The defendant can prove that it informed the plaintiff of the risk and that the plaintiff ignored the defendant’s warnings.
4.) All of the above are good defenses to an action based on strict liability.
1.) The defendant can show that the escape which caused the loss was caused by someone over whom the defendant had no control.
Sylvester suffers from an unusual allergy to bird feathers. his next door neighbour, Granny, unaware of Sylvester’s allergy, purchases a canary. Every day Granny lets her canary out to fly around the garden. Unfortunately, the wind carries the canary’s feathers onto Sylvester’s property and Sylvester must run inside or suffer through hours of sneezing and wheezing. as a result, Sylvester is unable to enjoy his back yard. Which of the following statements is TRUE?
1.) This is an example of a private nuisance. Sylvester has suffered unreasonable interference with the use and enjoyment of his property.
2.) This is an example of many trespasses which together constitute a private nuisance. Sylvester will be able to apply for abatement or injunctive relief.
3.) Granny had a duty to inquire whether Sylvester had any unusual allergies or sensitivities when she purchased her canary. As a result of her negligence, she will be liable to Sylvester for damages and will have to keep her canary inside.
4.) Sylvester’s allergy goes beyond that of the average, reasonable person and Granny could not reasonably be expected to know she was causing a nuisance, therefore she is not liable.
4.) Sylvester’s allergy goes beyond that of the average, reasonable person and Granny could not reasonably be expected to know she was causing a nuisance, therefore she is not liable.
Douglas has just purchased a beautiful but run-down house in Hamilton. He has plans to extensively renovate the property in order to have three separate apartment units to help him with the mortgage. Douglas carefully reviews the various contractors who have made estimates on the job and finally selects Larry the Electrician, Curly the builder and Moe the plumber. While rewiring the kitchen Larry carelessly connects two wires causing a short in the system which leaves the entire neighbourhood without electricity. While on his break, Curly goes to the corner store in his truck and hits another car while bending down to adjust his radio. Because it is a hot summer day, Moe takes pity on the neighbourhood kids and opens the fire hydrant on the edge of Douglas’ property. The water flowing from the hydrant runs into Mrs. Jones’ yard and washes away her prized azaleas. For which of these acts will Douglas be vicariously liable?
1.) All of them
2.) Only for Larry and Moe’s acts
3.) Only for Larry’s
4.) None of them
4.) None of them
Carmela has an absolute hatred for visible electric service wires. She is only willing to live in a house that has underground service wiring. She goes to an open house being held by Beatrice and tells Beatrice that she likes the house very much, but is quite disturbed by the electrical wires, which are particularly visible from the family room and kitchen windows. Beatrice informs Carmela that the city encourages homeowners to move their wires underground as part of its beautification project, and that the chares involved would be minimal. Carmela buys the house and is horrified when she learns from the city clerk that the entire cost of burying the wires must be borne by her and the cost could exceed $1,000. Which of the following statements is TRUE?
1.) Carmela has no right to sue Beatrice because she was only giving her opinion and did not tell Carmela that she could rely on it.
2.) If Beatrice made her statement to Carmela knowing that it was false, then she would be liable for damages for deceit.
3.) For a “special relationship” giving rise to a duty of care to exist, it is necessary for there to be a contractual relationship between the parties.
4.) All of the above statements are true.
2.) If Beatrice made her statement to Carmela knowing that it was false, then she would be liable for damages for deceit.
Robin is having no luck in his search for a house with a pool. One Sunday he spots an open house and goes in. The house is everything he is looking for except that it doesn’t have a pool. When he mentions this to Rebecca, the real estate salesperson holding the open house, she tells him that there would be no problem installing a pool because the backyard is large enough and two other houses on the street have pools. Robin decides that this is what he will do. When Robin tries to get a building permit three months after moving into the house, he is told that sewer pipes run across his backyard at such an angle that there is no way he could install any size of pool. Which of the following statements are TRUE?
1.) robin will not have any legal recourse against Rebecca because they were not in a special relationship.
2.) To prove that the statement was a fraudulent misrepresentation, Robin will have to show that Rebecca made the statement knowing it was false or recklessly, not caring whether it was true or false.
3.) If Rebecca’s statement was a negligent misrepresentation, Robin will not be able to claim damages; the only remedy available will be rescission.
4.) If Rebecca’s statement to Robin was an innocent misrepresentation, Robin will only be entitled to damages; he will not be able to rescind the contract.
2.) To prove that the statement was a fraudulent misrepresentation, Robin will have to show that Rebecca made the statement knowing it was false or recklessly, not caring whether it was true or false.
