Stella bought a cup of coffee at the drive-through window at a ...

[mp14]

Stella bought a cup of coffee at the drive-through window at a coffee shop. Holding the cup between her knees and attempting to take off the lid to add cream, she spilled the coffee. She suffered burns to her thighs. If this happened in Canada, which of the following is true?
◦ If the court finds the plaintiff contributorily negligent, causing 60% of her loss, Stella must suffer that portion of the loss and will not be compensated for it by the defendant.
◦ To succeed with the defence that Stella volunteered to take the risk, the coffee shop would have to prove that Stella deliberately spilled the coffee.
◦ If Stella sues the coffee shop for negligence, she will only have to prove that the company owed her a duty of care.
◦ If the coffee shop claims there was no way to reasonably foresee that Stella would be harmed, the plaintiff's case would be dismissed even though Stella suffered burns.
◦ If Stella sues the coffee shop, the company's best argument is that it didn't owe her a duty of care.

[mcomstock09]

A FREE account is required to view all solutions! Click to Register

Login with Facebook Login with Google Login with Email

Lorsum iprem. Lorsus sur ipci. Lorsem sur iprem. Lorsum sur ipdi, lorsem sur ipci. Lorsum sur iprium, valum sur ipci et, vala sur ipci. Lorsem sur ipci, lorsa sur iprem. Valus sur ipdi. Lorsus sur iprium nunc, valem sur iprium. Valem sur ipdi. Lorsa sur iprium. Lorsum sur iprium. Valem sur ipdi. Vala sur ipdi nunc, valem sur ipdi, valum sur ipdi, lorsem sur ipdi, vala sur ipdi. Valem sur iprem nunc, lorsa sur iprium. Valum sur ipdi et, lorsus sur ipci. Valem sur iprem. Valem sur ipci. Lorsa sur iprium. Lorsem sur ipci, valus sur iprem. Lorsem sur iprem nunc, valus sur iprium.

Answer Preview

Only 50% of students answer this correctly

[mp14]

Thanks for the timely response, appreciate it

[robbielu01]

Excellent