Problem
Paula and her friend Pat entered a store, where they are regular customers. They selected some clothes, put them in a box and tuck them under a counter with the intention to return in the evening for them.
Sonia saw them but did not bother them, as they did it all the while.
On this occasion, Paula and Pat did not return until 7 days' time with their parents.
By then, the manager had sold the clothes. The parents accused the manager and Sonia of breaking a contract and threatened to sue them.
Required
I. Advise Paula and Pat about their chances of winning the case, using case law to support your advice.
II. Former head of the Strategic Planning and Project Management Centre at the Bank of Jamaica (BOJ), Karim Kiffin, who was dismissed without cause in 2018 by the Central Bank, received a $50.2-million award yesterday by a panel of three adjudicators at the Industrial Disputes Tribunal (IDT) who concluded that he was "unjustifiably dismissed".
The sum, while deemed to be one of the higher awards handed down by the tribunal, was $63 million less than the amount claimed by Kiffin but $39 million more than the initial sum the Bank said he should be paid if an award were to be made on the basis of unfair dismissal. Source: Jamaica Gleaner. Published February 18, 2020
Required Differentiate between 'unjustified/wrongful dismissal' and 'unfair dismissal', as put forward in the scenario and state the Jamaican Law relevant to employment contracts.
III. Mrs Jenkins was a passenger in the car of Mr. Harry, who was driving in a very erratic manner under the influence of alcohol. During the journey, Mrs. Jenkins once had the opportunity to leave the car after becoming aware of Mr. Harry's condition, when he stopped the car at certain place for half an hour. However, Mrs. Jenkins chose to remain in the car. The car met in an accident soon after, due to negligence of part of the driver Mr. Harry. Mr. Harry died as a result of injury to brain during the accident.
Mrs. Jenkins suffered personal injuries and remained in trauma for quite some time.
On recovering from her injuries, Mrs. Jenkins brought an action against Mr. Harry's widow, who was representing his estate, for damages caused to her during the accident, due to the negligence of Mr. Harry.
Mrs. Harry, during the course of proceedings, raised the question of Volenti non fit injuria, meaning that Mrs. Jenkins herself had invited injuries by remaining in the car, even after being aware of Mr. Harry's drunkenness, so she contributed to her own injury and thus not fit enough to claim any damages.
Task
• Critically examine the given case on the basis of principle of contributory neglignce and Volent if not fit Injuria Principle - One who causes injury to himself is not fit enough to claim any damages).
• Give your arguments in favour of and against the claim of Mrs. Jenkins and arrive at a reasoned judgment duly supported by the case laws.