Please I need a detailed answer at 500 words at least. Thanks Question # 1: Neal

Question

Please I need a detailed answer at 500 words at least. Thanks

Question # 1: Neal, a twelve-year old boy, buys a pair of skis from Outdoor Outfitters (“OO”). He tells the salesperson that he has never been skiing but “he really wants to do it.” The OO salesperson urges Neal to take a lesson in the sport before participating in a run. Neal ignores this advice. The skis were not defective in design or construction. On his first run down the intermediate slope he loses control and runs into a tree. He suffers a broken leg, assorted cuts and bruises and he has concussion symptoms. Neal’s parents file a lawsuit against OO alleging that it should not have sold the skis to him when he was clearly too young and inexperienced. Discuss the theory of liability upon which the lawsuit is based and what, if any, defenses OO may raise.

Explanation / Answer

Explanation:

The case is and lawsuit is based upon the strict liability tort, the Outfdoor Outfitters salesperson forget to performed, though the there was no fault in product but the boy was just 12 year old boy and never been tried or taken proper lesson to this sport of skies and salesperson sold him that product and let him take part in a run. Salesperson should not have sold that pair of skies which brought lawsuit for OO.

- The defence for the Outdoor Outfitters have is that, Outdoor Outfitters sales person has warned Neal, a 12 year old boy that he must take a lesson before he takes part in run but the boy did not listen to the salesperson and get injured in run.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse P
• Subjects