Get Scenario assignment help on Property by the US and Australian assignment help writer. Get original assignment help now.
Scenario 2: Property
Frankie Smith age 12, lived with his mother, Vanessa Smith, in a rental house next to a farm owned by Daphne and Brandon Brown. On the back of the farm property was a small creek that had good fishing, but there were deadly piranha in the waters. Frankie would often sneak onto the farm property to fish. One day, while fishing on the farm, he was bitten by a piranha and severely injured. While running to help her son on the farm property, Vanessa tripped on a wire and broke her leg. The Smiths sue the Browns for their injuries.
Explain whether theBrowns owe a duty of care to Frankie and Vanessad that some of these payments were voidable preferences. Is the trustee correct? If so, which payment(s) is a voidable preference and why?
Scenario assignment help
Duty of care refers to the individual’s responsibility to take care of people and they will not suffer with any unreasonable harm or loss. This duty is mainly regards for person who is owed by the individual. As per the duty relates, if that individual do not follow that promise and someone get harmed by his or her irresponsibility then one should be liable to get sued by that injured or harmed person (Moffat & Bean, 2005).
In this scenario, Frankie Smith is of age 12 and lived with mother in a rental house owned by Daphne and Brandon Brown. Frankie and Vanessa were got injured in property of Browns so it was responsibility of Browns to take care of such hazardous creek which has deadly piranha. If they know that piranha may harm someone then it was their duty of care that they will make some boundaries around it. Also, the injury of Vanessa is also reflects the negligence of Browns of duty of care as it was their duty to put wires in non-harmful condition (Christensen, Duncan & Walsh, 2004). Therefore, both Frankie and Vanessa were owed by Brown under the duty of care. It was the responsibility of owner to take care of property and made some arrangements it there hazardous things are available.
Get quality assignment help from business experts. We assure you that you will get business assignment help and scenario case study assignment help according to the assignment guidelines.
So contact us for assignment help at
USA/Canada Toll Free Phone: 001-877-839-9989
Australia Phone Number: +61-3-9088-1335
E-mail: info@assignmenthelpexperts.com
Scenario 2: Property
Frankie Smith age 12, lived with his mother, Vanessa Smith, in a rental house next to a farm owned by Daphne and Brandon Brown. On the back of the farm property was a small creek that had good fishing, but there were deadly piranha in the waters. Frankie would often sneak onto the farm property to fish. One day, while fishing on the farm, he was bitten by a piranha and severely injured. While running to help her son on the farm property, Vanessa tripped on a wire and broke her leg. The Smiths sue the Browns for their injuries.
Explain whether theBrowns owe a duty of care to Frankie and Vanessad that some of these payments were voidable preferences. Is the trustee correct? If so, which payment(s) is a voidable preference and why?
Scenario assignment help
Duty of care refers to the individual’s responsibility to take care of people and they will not suffer with any unreasonable harm or loss. This duty is mainly regards for person who is owed by the individual. As per the duty relates, if that individual do not follow that promise and someone get harmed by his or her irresponsibility then one should be liable to get sued by that injured or harmed person (Moffat & Bean, 2005).
In this scenario, Frankie Smith is of age 12 and lived with mother in a rental house owned by Daphne and Brandon Brown. Frankie and Vanessa were got injured in property of Browns so it was responsibility of Browns to take care of such hazardous creek which has deadly piranha. If they know that piranha may harm someone then it was their duty of care that they will make some boundaries around it. Also, the injury of Vanessa is also reflects the negligence of Browns of duty of care as it was their duty to put wires in non-harmful condition (Christensen, Duncan & Walsh, 2004). Therefore, both Frankie and Vanessa were owed by Brown under the duty of care. It was the responsibility of owner to take care of property and made some arrangements it there hazardous things are available.
Get quality assignment help from business experts. We assure you that you will get business assignment help and scenario case study assignment help according to the assignment guidelines.
So contact us for assignment help at
USA/Canada Toll Free Phone: 001-877-839-9989
Australia Phone Number: +61-3-9088-1335
E-mail: info@assignmenthelpexperts.com
0 comments:
Post a Comment