I've been given scenario to work on
and we have to spot what laws apply to the scenarios It is a scenario of a new nightclub
Meanwhile, in the second room they have no idea as to what is happening. Silas is on a raised stage, with a rail around it and security bouncers ensuring that no-one gets onto the stage.
There is a prominent lit notice stating “Danger do not climb on the stage”. Suddenly, three of the audience, Sunny, Sue and Stuart decide that it would be fun to jump up and dance on the stage. The security bouncer manages to get Sunny off the stage, but Stuart and Sue start dancing. They do not realise that the stage has not been completed and that the structure is only temporary.
The Bar Manager, Sanjiv, has worked for Stars for 5 years in a variety of establishments. His wife gave birth to their first child, 3 months ago. She intends to return to her work as an Accountant after 6 months. Sanjiv wishes to undertake the child care for as long as he can, without leaving his employment.
The stage collapses under their weight, Sue, Stuart and Silas are injured as a result.
I am aware that the following topics are evident in the scenarios but how will I explain this?
Termination of employment: unfair dismissal
Need some help on a law case study please!! Watch
- Thread Starter
- 13-05-2013 22:45
- 14-05-2013 16:50
this is a very confused question. Are you saying Silas is meant to be on the stage or not as he seems to be on it before the others without any of the bouncers removing him like they did with the others. Also in scenario two you say there is a sign that is prominently lit, normally a question wouldn't be so clear cut as to say there was definite grounds for the defendant not to have contributed to negligence. Further to this the fact that bouncers are removing them would be further warnings. There are really no grounds for a claim in negligence and if so the defendant could definitely claim contributory negligence from the claimants.
Scenario three is again fairly simple as equality EU laws suggest that males are allowed to take maternity leave also, although this would be a shorter time than for a woman.
Finally the fact that the manager had prominent lit signs, bouncers, railings and other signs plus active restraint of one of the appellants would suggest that he did everything in his power and that through the claimants actions the stage was damaged and so could in fact sue the claimants.
The ambiguity arises from whether silas was allowed on stage when he shouldn't have been, you haven't given enough info