Saturday, August 31, 2019

The Vampire Diaries: The Fury Chapter Seven

â€Å"To cooperate at what?† Meredith asked. â€Å"I'll explain about that later. But first I want to know what's been going on in town since I-left.† â€Å"Well, hysteria mostly,† Meredith said, raising an eyebrow. â€Å"Your Aunt Judith's been pretty badly off. She hallucinated that she saw you-only it wasn't a hallucination, was it? And she and Robert have sort of broken up.† â€Å"I know,† Elena said grimly. â€Å"Go on.† â€Å"Everybody at school is upset. I wanted to talk to Stefan, especially when I began to suspect you weren't really dead, but he hasn't been at school. Matt has been, but there's something wrong with him. He looks like a zombie, and he won't talk to anyone. I wanted to explain to him that there was a chance you might not be gone forever; I thought that would cheer him up. But he wouldn't listen. He was acting totally out of character, and at one point I thought he was going to hit me. He wouldn't listen to a word.† â€Å"Oh, God-Matt.† Something terrible was stirring at the bottom of Elena's mind, some memory too disturbing to be let loose. She couldn't cope with anything more just now, she couldn't, she thought, and slam dunked the memory back down. Meredith was going on. â€Å"It's clear, though, that some other people are suspicious about your ‘death.' That's why I said what I did in the memorial service; I was afraid if I said the real day and place that Alaric Saltzman would end up ambushing you outside the house. He's been asking all sorts of questions, and it's a good thing Bonnie didn't know anything she could blab.† â€Å"That isn't fair,† Bonnie protested. â€Å"Alaric's just interested, that's all, and he wants to help us through the trauma, like before. He's an Aquarius-â€Å" â€Å"He's a spy,† said Elena, â€Å"and maybe more than that. But we'll talk about that later. What about Tyler Smallwood? I didn't see him at the service.† Meredith looked nonplussed. â€Å"You mean you don't know?† â€Å"I don't know anything; I've been asleep for four days in an attic.† â€Å"Well†¦Ã¢â‚¬  Meredith paused uneasily. â€Å"Tyler just got back from the hospital. Same with Dick Carter and those four tough guys they had along with them on Founders' Day. They were attacked in the Quonset hut that evening and they lost a lot of blood.† â€Å"Oh.† The mystery of why Stefan's Powers had been so much stronger that night was explained. And why they'd been getting weaker ever since. He probably hadn't eaten since then. â€Å"Meredith, is Stefan a suspect?† â€Å"Well, Tyler's father tried to make him one, but the police couldn't make the times work out. They know approximately when Tyler was attacked because he was supposed to meet Mr. Smallwood, and he didn't show up. And Bonnie and I can alibi Stefan for that time because we'd just left him by the river with your body. So he couldn't have gotten back to the Quonset hut to attack Tyler-at least no normal human could. And so far the police aren't thinking about anything supernatural.† supposed to meet Mr. Smallwood, and he didn't show up. And Bonnie and I can alibi Stefan for that time because we'd just left him by the river with your body. So he couldn't have gotten back to the Quonset hut to attack Tyler-at least no normal human could. And so far the police aren't thinking about anything supernatural.† â€Å"Tyler and those guys can't identify the attacker because they can't remember a thing about that afternoon,† Meredith added. â€Å"Neither can Caroline.† â€Å"Caroline was in there?† â€Å"Yes, but she wasn't bitten. Just in shock. In spite of everything she's done, I almost feel sorry for her.† Meredith shrugged and added, â€Å"She looks pretty pathetic these days.† â€Å"And I don't think anyone will ever suspect Stefan after what happened with those dogs at church today,† Bonnie put in. â€Å"My dad says that a big dog could have broken the window in the Quonset hut, and the wounds in Tyler's throat looked sort of like animal wounds. I think a lot of people believe it was a dog or a pack of dogs that did it.† â€Å"It's a convenient explanation,† Meredith said dryly. â€Å"It means they don't have to think any more about it.† â€Å"But that's ridiculous,† said Elena. â€Å"Normal dogs don't behave that way. Aren't people wondering about why their dogs would suddenly go mad and turn on them?† â€Å"Lots of people are just getting rid of them. Oh, and I heard someone talk about mandatory rabies testing,† Meredith said. â€Å"But it's not just rabies, is it, Elena?† â€Å"No, I don't think so. And neither do Stefan or Damon. And that's what I came over to talk to you about.† Elena explained, as clearly as she could, what she had been thinking about the Other Power in Fell's Church. She told about the force that had chased her off the bridge and about the feeling she'd had with the dogs and about everything she and Stefan and Damon had discussed. She finished with, â€Å"And Bonnie said it herself in church today: ‘Something evil.' I think that's what's here in Fell's Church, something nobody knows about, something completely evil. I don't suppose you know what you meant by that, Bonnie.† But Bonnie's mind was running on another track. â€Å"So Damon didn't necessarily do all those awful things you said he did,† she said shrewdly. â€Å"Like killing Yangtze and hurting Vickie and murdering Mr. Tanner, and all. I told you nobody that gorgeous could be a psycho killer.† â€Å"I think,† said Meredith with a glance at Elena, â€Å"that you had better forget about Damon as a love interest.† â€Å"Yes,† said Elena emphatically. â€Å"He did kill Mr. Tanner, Bonnie. And it stands to reason he did the other attacks, too; I'll ask him about that. And I'm having enough trouble dealing with him myself. You don't want to mess with him, Bonnie, believe me.† â€Å"I'm supposed to leave Damon alone; I'm supposed to leave Alaric alone†¦ Are there any guys I'm not supposed to leave alone? And meanwhile Elena gets them all. It's not fair.† â€Å"I don't know. Something tremendously strong-but it could be shielding itself so that we can't sense it. It could look like an ordinary person. And that's why I came for your help, because it could be anybody in Fell's Church. It's like what Bonnie said during the service today: ‘Nobody is what they seem.' â€Å" Bonnie looked forlorn. â€Å"I don't remember saying that.† â€Å"You said it, all right. ‘Nobody is what they seem,' † Elena quoted again weightily. â€Å"Nobody.† She glanced at Meredith, but the dark eyes under the elegantly arched eyebrows were calm and distant. â€Å"Well, that would seem to make everybody a suspect,† Meredith said in her most unruffled voice. â€Å"Right?† â€Å"Right,† said Elena. â€Å"But we'd better get a note pad and pencil and make a list of the most important ones. Damon and Stefan have already agreed to help investigate, and if you'll help, too, we'll stand an even better chance of finding it.† She was hitting her stride with this; she'd always been good at organizing things, from schemes to get boys to fundraising events. This was just a more serious version of the old plan A and plan B. Meredith gave the pencil and paper to Bonnie, who looked at it. and then at Meredith, and then at Elena. â€Å"Fine,† she said, â€Å"but who goes on the list?† â€Å"Well, anyone we have reason to suspect of being the Other Power. Anyone who might have done the things we know it did: seal Stefan in the well, chase me, set those dogs on people. Anyone we've noticed behaving oddly.† â€Å"Matt,† said Bonnie, writing busily. â€Å"And Vickie. And Robert.† â€Å"Bonnie!† exclaimed Elena and Meredith simultaneously. Bonnie looked up. â€Å"Well, Matt has been acting oddly, and so has Vickie, for months now. And Robert was hanging around outside the church before the service, but he never came in-â€Å" â€Å"Oh, Bonnie, honestly,† Meredith said. â€Å"Vickie's a victim, not a suspect. And if Matt's an evil Power, I'm the hunchback of Notre Dame. And as for Robert-â€Å" â€Å"Fine, I've crossed it all out,† said Bonnie coldly. â€Å"Now let's hear your ideas.† â€Å"No, wait,† Elena said. â€Å"Bonnie, wait a moment.† She was thinking about something, something that had been nagging at her for quite a while, ever since- â€Å"Ever since the church,† she said aloud, remembering it. â€Å"Do you know, I saw Robert outside the church, too, when I was hidden in the choir loft. It was just before the dogs attacked, and he was sort of backing away like he knew what was going to happen.† â€Å"Oh, but Elena-â€Å" Soberly, after a moment's hesitation, Bonnie did. â€Å"Who else?† she said. â€Å"Well, Alaric, I'm afraid,† Elena said. â€Å"I'm sorry, Bonnie, but he's practically number one.† She told what she had overheard that morning between Alaric and the principal. â€Å"He isn't a normal history teacher; they called him here for some reason. He knows I'm a vampire, and he's looking for me. And today, while the dogs were attacking, he was standing there on the sidelines making some kind of weird gestures. He's definitely not what he seems, and the only question is: what is he? Are you listening, Meredith?† â€Å"Yes. You know, I think you should put Mrs. Flowers on that list. Remember the way she stood at the window of the boarding-house when we were bringing Stefan back from the well? But she wouldn't come downstairs to open the door for us? That's odd behavior.† Elena nodded. â€Å"Yes, and how she kept hanging up on me when I called him. And she certainly keeps to herself in that old house. She may just be a dotty old lady, but put her down anyway, Bonnie.† She ran a hand through her hair, lifting it off the back of her neck. She was hot. Or-not hot exactly, but uncomfortable in some way that was similar to being overheated. She felt parched. â€Å"All right, we'll go by the boardinghouse tomorrow before school,† Meredith said. â€Å"Meanwhile, what else can we be doing? Let's have a look at that list, Bonnie.† Bonnie held the list out so they could see it, and Elena and Meredith leaned forward and read: Matt Honeycutt Vickie Bennett Robert Maxwell-What was he doing at the church when the dogs attacked? And what was going on that night with Elena's aunt? Alaric Saltzman-Why does he ask so many questions? What was he called to Fell's Church to do? Mrs. Flowers-Why does she act so strange? Why didn't she let us in the night Stefan was wounded? â€Å"Good,† Elena said. â€Å"I guess we could also find out whose dogs were at the church today. And you can watch Alaric at school tomorrow.† â€Å"I'll watch Alaric,† Bonnie said firmly. â€Å"And I'll get him cleared of suspicion; you see if I don't.† â€Å"Fine, you do that. You can be assigned to him. And Meredith can investigate Mrs. Flowers, and I can take Robert. And as for Stefan and Damon-well, they can be assigned to everyone, because they can use their Powers to probe people's minds. Besides, that list is by no means complete. I'm going to ask them to scout around town searching for any signs of Power, or anything else weird going on. They're more likely than I am to recognize it.† â€Å"Fine, you do that. You can be assigned to him. And Meredith can investigate Mrs. Flowers, and I can take Robert. And as for Stefan and Damon-well, they can be assigned to everyone, because they can use their Powers to probe people's minds. Besides, that list is by no means complete. I'm going to ask them to scout around town searching for any signs of Power, or anything else weird going on. They're more likely than I am to recognize it.† â€Å"Elena. Elena!† Startled, Elena looked up, to see Meredith's wary dark eyes and Bonnie's alarmed expression. It was only then that she realized she was crouched close to Bonnie's wrist, rubbing the biggest vein with her finger. â€Å"Sorry,† she murmured, sitting back. But she could feel the extra length and sharpness of her canine teeth. It was something like wearing braces; she could clearly feel the difference in weight. She realized her reassuring smile at Bonnie was not having the desired effect. Bonnie was looking scared, which was silly. Bonnie ought to know that Elena would never hurt her. And Elena wasn't very hungry tonight; Elena had always been a light eater. She could get all she needed from this tiny vein here in the wrist†¦ Elena jumped to her feet and spun toward the window, leaning against the casing, feeling the cool night air blowing on her skin. She felt dizzy, and she couldn't seem to get her breath. What had she been doing? She turned around to see Bonnie huddled close to Meredith, both of them looking sick with fear. She hated having them look at her that way. â€Å"I'm sorry,† she said. â€Å"I didn't mean to, Bonnie. Look, I'm not coming any closer. I should have eaten before I came here. Damon said I'd get hungry later.† Bonnie swallowed, looking even sicker. â€Å"Eaten?† â€Å"Yes, of course,† Elena said tartly. Her veins were burning; that was what this feeling was. Stefan had described it before, but she'd never really understood; she'd never realized what he was going through when the need for blood was on him. It was terrible, irresistible. â€Å"What do you think I eat these days, air?† she added defiantly. â€Å"I'm a hunter now, and I'd better go out hunting.† Bonnie and Meredith were trying to cope; she could tell they were, but she could also see the revulsion in their eyes. She concentrated on using her new senses, in opening herself to the night and searching for Stefan's or Damon's presence. It was difficult, because neither of them was projecting with his mind as he had been the night they'd been fighting in the woods, but she thought she could sense a glimmer of Power out there in the town. When the bulb was finally screwed back in, it revealed Damon sitting casually but precariously on the sill of the open window, one knee up. He was smiling one of his wildest smiles. â€Å"Do you mind?† he said. â€Å"This is uncomfortable.† Elena glanced back at Bonnie and Meredith, who were braced against the closet, looking horrified and hypnotized at once. She herself shook her head, exasperated. â€Å"And I thought I liked to make a dramatic entrance,† she said. â€Å"Very funny, Damon. Now let's go.† â€Å"With two such beautiful friends of yours right here?† Damon smiled again at Bonnie and Meredith. â€Å"Besides, I only just got here. Won't somebody be polite and ask me in?† Bonnie's brown eyes, fixed helplessly on his face, softened a bit. Her lips, which had been parted in horror, parted further. Elena recognized the signs of imminent meltdown. â€Å"No, they won't,† she said. She put herself directly between Damon and the other girls. â€Å"Nobody here is for you, Damon-not now, not ever.† Seeing the flare of challenge in his eyes, she added archly, â€Å"And anyway, I'm leaving. I don't know about you, but I'm going hunting.† She was reassured to sense Stefan's presence nearby, on the roof probably, and to hear his instant amendment: We're going hunting, Damon. You can sit there all night if you want. Damon gave in with good grace, shooting one last amused glance toward Bonnie before disappearing from the window. Bonnie and Meredith both started forward in alarm as he did, obviously concerned that he had just fallen to his death. â€Å"He's fine,† said Elena, shaking her head again. â€Å"And don't worry, I won't let him come back. I'll meet you at the same time tomorrow. Good-bye.† â€Å"But-Elena-† Meredith stopped. â€Å"I mean, I was going to ask you if you wanted to change your clothes.† Elena regarded herself. The nineteenth-century heirloom dress was tattered and bedraggled, the thin white muslin shredded in some places. But there was no time to change it; she had to feed now. â€Å"It'll have to wait,† she said. â€Å"See you tomorrow.† And she boosted herself out of the window the way Damon had. The last she saw of them, Meredith and Bonnie were staring after her dazedly. â€Å"Your cloak,† she said, pleased. For a moment they smiled at each other, remembering the first time he had given her the cloak, after he'd saved her from Tyler in the graveyard and taken her back to his room to clean up. He'd been afraid to touch her then. But, Elena thought, smiling up into his eyes, she had taken care of that fear rather quickly. â€Å"I thought we were hunting,† Damon said. Elena turned the smile on him, without unlinking her hand from Stefan's. â€Å"We are,† she said. â€Å"Where should we go?† â€Å"Any house on this street,† Damon suggested. â€Å"The woods,† Stefan said. â€Å"The woods,† Elena decided. â€Å"We don't touch humans, and we don't kill. Isn't that how it goes, Stefan?† He returned the pressure of her fingers. â€Å"That's how it goes,† he said quietly. Damon's lip curled fastidiously. â€Å"And just what are we looking for in the woods, or don't I want to know? Muskrat? Skunk? Termites?† His eyes moved to Elena and his voice dropped. â€Å"Come with me, and I'll show you some real hunting.† â€Å"We can go through the graveyard,† Elena said, ignoring him. â€Å"White-tailed deer feed all night in the open areas,† Stefan told her, â€Å"but we'll have to be careful stalking them; they can hear almost as well as we can.† Another time, then, Damon's voice said in Elena's mind.

Friday, August 30, 2019

Lawn Care Case Essay

1) A) Currently Lawn Care focuses on quality and innovation. Their product is said to be the best available with the highest quality grass seed and fertilizer in the world. They are also a very well known company which is another competitive advantage. They specialize in providing the best and quickly delivering the product to the customer demanding the product. B) The company perceives the quality of their products, and their direct delivery to be the order winner for the company. They provide what is expected, in terms of high quality seed and fertilizer, making this also an order qualifier. Another company, such as their competitor may consider the installation they proved to be the order winner, in that it sets them apart from their competition. C) CBP 2) A) Lawn Cares competitor’s current strategic mission is to provide a bundle package. Their competitive advantage is that they also install the product. They save the customer time, and create convenience for the customer because they do not have to find and contact and plan with a third party to have the work done. B) The competitor perceives the need for seed, fertilizer, and sod as the order qualifier, and the installation and additional yard work they provide as the order winner because it sets them apart from their competition, Lawn Care. 3) If Lawn Care were to add the application business to their existing business they would need to secure more employees. They would need employees who have experience in landscaping and are able to do the physical labor. This could take months to find and train the new employees. They would also need to purchase equipment such as lawn mowers, trucks, trailers, etc. to  assist in the application side of the business. This would involve using some of their assets to purchase and later on repair and manage upkeep, but they would achieve a gain in capital equipment assets. Lawn Care would also have to use additional resources to market their new service bundle. The addition of installation would not do the company any good if nobody knew they were now offering the service. It may be beneficial to the company if they contacted previous customers as well to tell them of the changes and see if they need any more work done. Changing advertisements and adding new advertisements and promoti ons would also take months, but would benefit the company in the long run. 4) Lawn Care would have to consider how the community and previous customers would react to the changes and whether they would find the change beneficial and take advantage of the new services offered. Stakeholders would be affected as well with the relocation of assets and the risks being taken by Lawn Care to add such a substantial portion to their business. The changes and how they will effect stock in the company is an important economic sustainability factor for the company to consider. The company was accused of pollution and other damage application mistakes before implementing this new service bundle. The company should consider environmental sustainability and because they would have more control of the application process than they did previously they will need to be more aware of how they are affecting the environment and what they can do to prevent any future claims against them. The company should also determine how they will market the product and how this will affect social sustainability. What can they do to make everyone aware of the products and gain back any customers they lost to their competition before offering the service? Lawn Care needs to consider how sustainable the service will be and make sure that it will be a lasting effort before purchasing the new equipment and implementing new processes. –

Thursday, August 29, 2019

Law of Tort

4. 0 INTRODUCTION Occupiers' liability generally refers to the duty owed by land owners to those who come onto their land. However, the duty imposed on land owners can  extend beyond simple land ownership and in some instances the landowners may transfer the duty to others, hence the term occupier rather than owner. The term occupier itself is misleading since physical occupation is not necessary for liability  to arise. Occupiers' liability is perhaps a distinct form of negligence in that there must be a duty of care and breach of duty, causing damage.The rules of remoteness apply to occupiers liability in the exact same way that they apply to negligence claims. Liability can arise on occupiers for omissions since their relationship  gives rise to  duty to take action to ensure the reasonable safety of visitors. The law relating to occupiers' liability originated in common law but is now contained in two major pieces of legislation: Occupiers Liability Act 1957   – which imposes an obligation on occupiers with regard to ‘lawful visitors' Occupiers Liability Act 1984 – which imposes liability on occupiers with regard to persons other than ‘his visitors'.Different levels of protection are expected under the two pieces of legislation with a higher level of protection afforded to lawful visitors. NB: Lawful visitors are owed the duty set out in the 1957 Act; non-lawful visitors are owed the duty set out in the 1984 Act. It is for the claimant to prove that he is a lawful visitor and therefore entitled to the more favorable duties in the earlier Act 4. 1 Occupiers( who is an occupier) At common law (and under the statute occupation is based on control and not necessarily on any title to or property interest in the land.Both the Occupiers Liability Acts of 1957 and 1984  impose an obligation on occupiers rather than land owners. The question of whether a particular person is an occupier is a question of fact and depends on the d egree of control exercised. The test applied is one of ‘occupational control' and there may be more than one occupier of the same premises: In Wheat v E Lacon & Co Ltd [1966] AC 522- House of Lords The claimant and her family stayed at a public house, The Golfer’s Arms in Great Yarmouth, for a holiday. Unfortunately her husband died when he fell down the stairs and hit his head.The stairs were steep and narrow. The handrail stopped two steps from the bottom of the stairs and there was no bulb in the light. The claimant brought an action under the Occupiers Liability Act 1957 against the Brewery company, Lacon, which owned the freehold of The Golfer’s Arms and against the Managers of the Pub, Mr. & Mrs. Richardson, who occupied the pub as a licensee. Held: Both the Richardson’s and Lacon were occupiers for the purposes of the Occupiers Liability Act 1957 and therefore both owed the common duty of care. It is possible to have more than one occupier.The quest ion of whether a particular person is an occupier under the Act is whether they have occupational control. Lacon had only granted a license to the Richardson’s and had retained the right to repair which gave them a sufficient degree of control. There is no requirement of physical occupation. However, it was found that Lacon was not in breach of duty since the provision of light bulbs would have been part of the day to day management duties of the Richardson’s. Since the Richardson’s were not party to the appeal the claimant’s action failed.Lord Denning: â€Å"wherever a person has a sufficient degree of control over premises that he ought to realize that any failure on his part to use care may result in injury to a person coming lawfully there, then he is an † occupier † and the person coming lawfully there is his † visitor â€Å": and the † occupier † is under a duty to his † visitor † to use reasonable care. I n order to be an â€Å"occupier â€Å"it is not necessary for a person to have entire control over the premises. He need not have exclusive occupation. Suffice it that he has some degree of control. He may share the control with others. Two or more may be â€Å"occupiers â€Å".And whenever this happens, each is under a duty to use care towards persons coming lawfully on to the premises, dependent on his degree of control. If each fails in his duty, each is liable to a visitor who is injured in consequence of his failure, but each may have a claim to contribution from the other. † Physical occupation is not a requirement: Harris v Birkenhead Corp [1976] 1 WLR 279 The claimant Julie Harris was 4 years old when she wandered off from a children’s play park with her friend. They entered a derelict house which was due for demolition. The house had not been secured and the door was open.They went upstairs and Julie sustained serious injury when she fell from a window. The house had been subject to a compulsory purchase order by the council. The house had been owned by a private landlord and the tenant was offered alternative accommodation by the council. The tenant informed the council that she did not want to take up the offer of accommodation and made her own arrangements and left the property. The council served 14 days notice on the owner of their intention to take possession of the property, but never actually took physical possession at the expiry of the 14 days.Held: The Council had the legal right to take possession to secure the property, actual physical occupation was not required to incur liability as an occupier. The council were therefore liable. 4. 1. 1 Occupiers Liability Act 1957 The Occupiers Liability Act 1957 imposes a common duty of care on occupiers to lawful visitors. By virtue of s. 1 (3) (a), the Act applies not only to land and buildings but also extends  to fixed and movable structures, including any vessel, vehicle or ai rcraft. The protected damage under the Occupiers Liability Act 1957 includes death, personal injury and damage to property. . 1. 1. 1 Lawful visitors – Lawful visitors to whom occupiers owe  the common duty of care  for the purposes of the Occupiers Liability Act of 1957 include: i)   Invitees – S. 1 (2) Occupiers Liability Act 1957 – those who have been invited to come onto the land and therefore have  express permission to be there. ii) Licensees – S. 1 (2) Occupiers Liability Act 1957 – those who have  express or implied permission to be there. According to S. 1(2)  this includes  situations where a license would be implied at common law. (See below) iii) Those who enter pursuant to a contract – s. (1) Occupiers Liability Act 1957 – For example paying guests at a hotel or paying visitors to a theatre performance or to see a film at a cinema. iv) Those entering in exercising a right conferred by law – s. 2(6) Oc cupiers Liability Act 1957 – For example  a person entering to read the gas or electricity meters, a police executing warrants of arrest or search) 4. 1. 1. 2 Implied license at common law In the absence of express permission to be on the land, a license may be implied at common law where there exists repeated trespass and no action taken by the occupier to prevent people coming on to the land.This requires an awareness of the trespass and the danger: Lowery v Walker [1911] AC 10  House of Lords The Claimant was injured by a horse when using a short cut across the defendant’s field. The land had been habitually used as a short cut by members of the public for many years and the defendant had taken no steps to prevent people coming on to the land. The defendant was aware that the horse was dangerous. Held: The defendant was liable. Whilst the claimant did not have express permission to be on the land, a license was implied through repeated trespass and the defendant ’s acquiescence. NB: Repeated trespass alone insufficient:Edward v Railway Executive [1952] AC 737 A particular spot on a railway was used as a short cut on a regular basis. The fence was repaired on several occasions and whenever it was reported to have been interfered with. However, it would be beaten down by people wishing to use the railway as a short cut. Witness testimony was to the effect that the fence was in good repair the morning of the incident. Held: No license was implied. The Defendant had taken reasonable steps to prevent people coming onto the railway. Lord Goddard: â€Å"Repeated trespass of itself confers no license† 4. 1. 1. 3 Allurement principleThe courts are more likely to imply a license if there is something on the land which is particularly attractive and acts as an allurement to draw people on to the land. Taylor v Glasgow Corporation [1922] 1 AC 448 House of Lords The defendants owned the Botanic Gardens of Glasgow, a park which was open to the public. On the park various botanic plants and shrubs grew. A boy of seven years ate some berries from one of the shrubs. The berries were poisonous and the boy died. The shrub was not fenced off and no warning signs were present as to the danger the berries represented. Held: Glasgow Corporation was liable.Children were entitled to go onto the land. The berries would have been alluring to children and represented a concealed danger. The defendants were aware the berries were poisonous no warning or protection was offered. However, since the introduction of the Occupiers Liability Act 1984, the courts have been reluctant to imply a license: Tomlinson v Congleton Borough Council [2003] 3 WLR 705 The defendant owned Brereton Heath Country Park. It had previously been a sand quarry and they transformed it in to a country park and opened it up for public use. The defendants had created a lake on the park which was surrounded by sandy banks.In the hot weather many visitors came to th e park. Swimming was not permitted in the lake and notices were posted at the entrance saying â€Å"Dangerous water. No swimming†. However despite this, many people did use the lake for swimming. Rangers were employed and on occasions sought to prevent swimming but some of the visitors would be rude to the rangers’ attempts to prevent them and many continued to swim. The claimant was injured when he dived into shallow water and broke his neck. At the Court of Appeal it was held that he was a trespasser despite the repeated trespass and inadequate steps to prevent him swimming.They also stated that the warning signs may have acted as an allurement to macho young men. The Court of Appeal was of the opinion that since the introduction of the Occupiers Liability Act 1984, the courts should not strain to imply a license. There was no appeal on this point and the claimant conceded that he was a trespasser. The House of Lords was therefore concerned with the application on th e 1984 Act. The Court of Appeal had held that the council were liable but reduced the damages by 2/3 under the Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945.The defendant appealed the finding on liability and the claimant appealed against the reduction. House of Lords held: The Council was not liable. No risk arose from the state of the premises as required under s. 1 (1) (a) Occupiers Liability Act 1984. The risk arose from the claimant’s own action. He was a person of full capacity who voluntarily and without pressure or inducement engaged in an activity which had an inherent risk. Even if there was a risk form the state of the premises, the risk was not one against which the council would reasonably be expected to offer the claimant some protection under s. (3) (C). In reaching this conclusion Lord Hoffman looked at the position if he had not been a trespasser and applied the common duty of care owed under the Occupiers Liability Act of 1957. He was of the opinion that the re was no duty to warn or take steps to prevent the claimant from diving as the dangers were perfectly obvious. This was based on the principle of free will and that to hold otherwise would deny the social benefit to the majority of the users of the park from using the park and lakes in a safe and responsible manner.To impose liability in this situation would mean closing of many such venues up and down the country for fear of litigation. He noted that 25-30 such fractures occurred each year nationwide, despite increased safety measures the numbers had remained constant. 4. 1. 1. 4 Non lawful visitors The 1957 Act does not extend protection to: ? trespassers ? Invitees who exceed their permission ? Persons on the land exercising a public right of way:   Ã‚  McGeown v Northern Ireland Housing Executive [1994] 3 All ER 53 House of Lords The claimant was injured when she tripped in a hole on land owned by the defendant.The land was a public right of way. It was held that the defendan t was not liable as  the claimant  was not a lawful visitor under the Occupiers Liability Act 1957 because she was exercising a public right of way. †¢ Persons on the land exercising a private right of way:   Ã‚  Ã‚  Holden v White [1982] 2 All ER 328 Court of Appeal The claimant, a milkman, was injured on the defendant’s land by a manhole cover which broke when he stepped on it. At the time he was delivering milk to the house of a third party who had a right of way across the defendant’s land.It was held that he was not entitled to claim against the defendant since he was exercising a right of way and was not therefore a lawful visitor of the defendant. 4. 1. 1. 5 The common duty of care The common duty of care is set out in s. 2 (2) Occupiers Liability Act 1957: S. 2(2)   – ‘The common duty of  care is to take such care as in all the circumstances of the case is reasonable to see that the  visitor will be reasonably safe in using the pre mises for the purposes for which he  is invited or permitted  by the occupier to be there. ‘   Thus the standard of care varies according to the circumstances.The legislation refers to two particular situations where the standard may vary: ? S. 2(3)(a) – an occupier must be prepared for children to be less careful than adults ? S. 2(3)(b) – an occupier may expect that a person  in the exercise of his calling will appreciate and guard against any special risks ordinarily incident to it i)   S. 2(3) (a) Child visitors The courts will take into account the age of the child and level of understanding a child of that age may be expected to have. They may be more adventurous and may not understand the nature of certain risks.The occupier does not however have to guarantee that the house will be safe, but only has to take reasonable care. If the child’s parents are present, they must share some responsibility, and, even if they are not present, it may b e relevant to the occupier’s duty that they thought it prudent to allow their child to be where he was. Titchener v British Railways Board [1983] 1 WLR 1427 House of Lords The Claimant, a 15 year old girl, was out walking with her boyfriend who was 16. They took a short cut across a railway line and they were both hit by a train. He was killed and she was seriously injured.There was a gap in the fence at the place where they crossed and there was a pathway leading to this gap which suggested that there was repeated trespass. Also it was accepted that either the Defendant was aware of the gap or would have been aware upon reasonable inspection. The Defendant raised the defense of volenti under s. 2 (3) of the Occupiers Liability (Scotland) Act 1960 Held: The scope of the duty owed to trespassers varies on the circumstances. On the facts of this case the Defendants did not owe a duty to a 15 year old trespasser who was fully aware of the risks.Even if the Defendant did owe a du ty of care the defense of volenti under s. 2 (3) would succeed. Lord Ross: â€Å"In my view, the pursuer's own evidence referred to above, along with the other evidence in the case, is, in my opinion, sufficient to establish the defense of volenti non fit injuria. Such defense is open to the defenders under section 2 (3) of the Occupiers' Liability (Scotland) Act 1960, and no duty under section 2 (1) of the Act is imposed upon an occupier to a person entering on the premises in respect of risks which that person has willingly accepted as his.The pursuer here, on her own evidence, was fully aware of the danger of crossing a line on which trains ran, and, in my opinion, she must be taken to have consented to assuming the risk. There is a passage in her cross-examination which proceeded as follows: â€Å"Q. And you knew that it would be dangerous to cross the line because of the presence of these trains? A. Yes. Q. Well why did you do it if you knew it would be dangerous? A. Because it was shorter to get to the brickworks. Q. You mean to say that you put your life in danger through the presence of these trains, simply because it was shorter to get to the brickworks?A. Well, before my accident I never ever thought that it would happen to me, that I would never get hit by a train, it was just a chance that I took. † â€Å"A person who takes a chance necessarily consents to take what come†   Ã‚  Jolley v Sutton [2000] 1 WLR 1082 Two 14 year old boys found an abandoned boat on land owned by the council and decided to do it up. The boat was in a thoroughly rotten condition and represented a danger. The council had stuck a notice on the boat warning not to touch the boat and that if the owner did not claim the boat within 7 days it would be taken away. The council never took it away.The boys had been working on the boat for 6-7 weeks when one of them suffered severe spinal injuries, resulting in paraplegia, when the boat fell on top of him. The boys ha d jacked the boat up to work on the underside and the jack went through the rotten wood. The claimant brought an action under the Occupiers Liability Act 1984. The trial judge found for the claimant. The Court of Appeal reversed the decision, holding that whilst it was foreseeable that younger children may play on the boat and suffer an injury by falling through the rotten wood, it was not foreseeable that older boys would try to do the boat up.The claimant appealed. House of Lords held: The claimant's appeal was allowed. The risk was that children would â€Å"meddle with the boat at the risk of some physical injury† The actual injury fell within that description. Lord Steyn: â€Å"The scope of the two modifiers – the precise manner in which the injury came about and its extent – is not definitively answered by either The Wagon Mound ( No. 1) or Hughes v. Lord Advocate. It requires determination in the context of an intense focus on the circumstances of each ca se. † Taylor v Glasgow Corporation [1922] 1 AC 448 House of LordsThe defendants owned the Botanic Gardens of Glasgow, a park which was open to the public. On the park various botanic plants and shrubs grew. A boy of seven years ate some berries from one of the shrubs. The berries were poisonous and the boy died. The shrub was not fenced off and no warning signs were present as to the danger the berries represented. Held: Glasgow Corporation was liable. Children were entitled to go onto the land. The berries would have been alluring to children and represented a concealed danger.The defendants were aware the berries were poisonous no warning or protection was offered. Phipps v Rochester Corporation [1955] 1 QB 450 A 5 year old boy was walking across some open ground with his 7 year old sister. He was not accompanied by an adult. He was injured when he fell into a trench. The Corporation were not held liable as an occupier is entitled to assume that prudent parents would not all ow their children to go unaccompanied to places where it is unsafe. Devlin J on duty owed to children â€Å"The law recognizes a sharp difference between children and adults.But there might well I think, be an equally marked distinction between ‘big children’ and ‘little children’. †¦The occupier is not entitled to assume that all children will, unless they are allured, behave like adults; but he is entitled to assume that normally little children will be accompanied by a responsible person. †¦The responsibility for the safety of little children must rest primarily upon the parents; it is their duty to see that such children are not allowed to wander about by themselves, or at least to satisfy themselves that the places to which they do allow their children to go unaccompanied are safe.It would not be socially desirable if parents were, as a matter of course, able to shift the burden of looking after their children from their own shoulders to tho se persons who happen to have accessible pieces of land. † ii) S. 2(3)(b) Common calling ( Trade Visitors) This provision applies where an occupier employs an expert to come on to the premises to undertake work. The expert can be taken to know and safeguard themselves against  any dangers that arise from the premises in relation to the calling of the expert. For example if an occupier engages an lectrician, the electrician  would be expected to know the dangers inherent in the work they are employed to do. Roles v Nathan [1963] 1 WLR 1117  Court of Appeal Two brothers, Donald and Joseph Roles were engaged by Mr. Nathan as chimney sweeps to clean the flues in a central heating system at Manchester Assembly Rooms. The flues had become dangerous due to carbon monoxide emissions. A heating engineer had warned them of the danger, however, the brothers told him they knew of the dangers and had been flue inspectors for many years.The engineer monitored the situation throughout the day and at one point ordered everybody out of the building due to the levels of carbon monoxide. The brothers ignored this advice and continued with their work. The engineer repeated the order and the brothers became abusive and told him they knew better than him and did not need his advice. The engineer forcibly removed them from the building. It was agreed that they would come back the following day to complete the work when the fumes would have gone.They were also told they should not do the work whilst the fires were lighted. However, the next day the brothers were found dead in the basement having returned the previous evening to complete the work when the fires were lit. Their widows brought an action under the Occupiers Liability Act 1957. Held: The defendant was not liable. The dangers were special risks ordinarily incident to their calling. The warnings issued were clear and the brothers would have been safe had they heeded the warnings. Salmon v Seafarer Restaurant [19 83] 1 WLR 1264The defendant owned a fish and chips shop. One night he left the chip fryer on and closed the shop for the night. This caused a fire and the fire services were called to put out the fire. The claimant was a fire man injured in an explosion whilst fighting the fire. He had been thrown to the ground whilst footing a ladder on a flat roof. The defendant sought to escape liability by invoking s. 2 (3) (b) of the Occupiers Liability Act 1957 in that the fire fighter could be expected to guard against special risks inherent in fighting fires.Held: The defendant was liable. Where it can be foreseen that the fire which is negligently started is of the type which could require firemen to attend to extinguish that fire, and where, because of the very nature of the fire, when they attend they will be at risk even if they exercise all the skill of their calling, there is no reason why a fireman should be at any disadvantage in claiming compensation. The duty owed to a fireman was not limited to the exceptional risks associated with fighting fire but extended to ordinary risks.Ogwo v Taylor [1987] 3 WLR 1145 House of Lords The Defendant attempted to burn off paint from the fascia boards beneath the eaves of his house with a blow lamp and in so doing set fire to the premises. The fire brigade were called and the Claimant, an acting leading fireman, and a colleague entered the house wearing breathing apparatus and the usual fireman's protective clothing and armed with a hose. The two firemen were able, with the aid of a step- ladder, to squeeze through a small hatch to get into the roof space. The heat within the roof space was intense.The Claimant suffered serious burn injuries to his upper body and face from scalding steam which must have penetrated his protective clothing. Held: A duty of care was owed to a professional fireman. There was no requirement that the risk be exceptional. The defense of volenti had no application. Lord Bridge: â€Å"The duty of p rofessional firemen is to use their best endeavors to extinguish fires and it is obvious that, even making full use of all their skills, training and specialist equipment, they will sometimes be exposed to unavoidable risks of injury, whether the fire is described as â€Å"ordinary† or â€Å"exceptional. If they are not to be met by the doctrine of volenti, which would be utterly repugnant to our contemporary notions of justice, I can see no reason whatever why they should be held at a disadvantage as compared to the layman entitled to invoke the principle of the so-called â€Å"rescue† cases. † iii)   Warnings and warning  signs It may be possible for an occupier to discharge their duty by giving a warning some danger on the premises(‘Loose carpet’; ‘slippery floor’) – See   Roles v Nathan [1963] 1 WLR 1117 above)   However, S. (4)(a) Occupiers Liability Act 1957 provides that a warning given to the visitor  will not b e treated as absolving the occupier of liability unless in all the circumstances it was enough to enable the visitor to be reasonably safe. The occupier i. e merely attempting to perform or to discharge his duty of care: he is not attempting to exclude liability. Is something slippery has been spilt on the floor of a shop, the occupier can (a) close the shop, (b) clean up the spillage or (c) give a warning so that the visitor can avoid the spot or step gingerly.The warning must  cover the danger that in fact arises: White v Blackmore [1972] 3 WLR 296 Mr. White was killed at a Jalopy car race due negligence in the way the safety ropes were set up. A car crashed into the ropes about 1/3 of a mile from the place where Mr. White was standing. Consequently he was catapulted 20 foot in the air and died from the injuries received. Mr. White was a driver in the race but at the time of the incident he was between races and standing close to his family. He had signed a competitors list whic h contained an exclusion clause.There was also a warning sign at the entrance to the grounds which stated that Jalopy racing is dangerous and the organizers accept no liability for any injury including death howsoever caused. The programme also contained a similar clause. His widow brought an action against the organizer of the event who defended on the grounds of  volenti  and that they had effectively excluded liability. Held: The defence of  volenti  was unsuccessful. Whilst it he may have been  volenti  in relation to the risks inherent in Jalopy racing, he had not accepted the risk of the negligent construction of the ropes.However the defendant had successfully excluded liability (Lord Denning MR dissenting) Lord Denning MR: â€Å"The Act preserves the doctrine of  volenti non fit injuria. It says in Section 2(5) that: â€Å"the common duty of care does not impose on an occupier any obligation to a visitor in respect of risks willingly accepted as his by the vi sitor†. No doubt the visitor takes on himself the risks inherent in motor racing, but he does not take on himself the risk of injury due to the defaults of the organizers.People go to race meetings to enjoy the sport. They like to see the competitors taking risks, but they do not like to take risks on themselves, even though it is a dangerous sport, they expect, and rightly expect, the organizers to erect proper barriers, to provide proper enclosures, and to do all that is reasonable to ensure their safety. If the organizers do everything that is reasonable, they are not liable if a racing car leaps the barriers and crashes into the crowd – see Hall v. Brooklands (1933) 1 K. B. 206.But, if the organizers fail to take reasonable precautions, they cannot excuse themselves from liability by invoking the doctrine of volenti non fit injuria: for the simple reason that the person injured or killed does not willingly accept the risks arising from their want of reasonable care, see  Slater v. Clay Cross Co. (1956) 2 Q. B. 20B; Wooldridge v. Summers (1963) 2 Q. B. at page 69; Nettleship v. Weston    (1971) 2 Q. B. at page 201. † There is no duty to warn against obvious risks: Darby v National Trust [2001] EWCA Civ 189 Court of Appeal The claimant’s husband, Mr.Darby, drowned in a pond owned by the National Trust (NT). The pond was one of five ponds in Hardwick Hall near Chesterfield. Two of the ponds were used for fishing and NT had taken steps to prevent the use of those ponds for swimming or paddling. However, with regards to the pond in which the fatality occurred, NT had done nothing to prevent visitors using the pond and it was common for visitors to use the pond for paddling and swimming during the warm summer months. On the day in question Mr. Darby had been paddling with his children around the edge of the pond.He then swam to the middle to play a game he had often played whereby he would go under water and then bob up to the surfa ce. However, he got into difficulty and drowned. The claimant argued that because  of NT’s inactivity in preventing swimmers using the pond, both she and her husband had assumed the pond was safe for swimming. Held: NT was not liable. The risk to swimmers in the pond was perfectly obvious. There was no duty to warn of an obvious risk Cotton v Derbyshire Dales District Council [1994] EWCA Civ 17 Court of AppealThe claimant, a 26 year old man, had gone out for the day with a group of friends and his fiance over the Easter bank holiday. They had visited 3 pubs where the claimant had drunk about 4 pints. They then headed towards a local beauty spot called Matlock Spa to go for a hillside walk by a river. The parties were in high spirits and became separated. The claimant and his fiance drifted from the pathway and he was seriously injured when he fell off a cliff. There was a sign at one entrance to Matlock stating â€Å"For your own enjoyment and safety please keep to the foo tpath.The cliffs can be very dangerous, and children must be kept under close supervision. † However, there was no such sign at the entrance used by the claimant. The claimant brought an action based on the Occupiers Liability Act 1957 for the failure to adequately warn him of the risk. Held: There was no obligation to warn of an obvious risk. The claimant would have been aware of the existence of the cliff so such a warning would not have affected events. Staples v West Dorset District Council [1995] EWCA Civ 30 Court of Appeal The claimant fractured his hip when he slipped and fell off a harbor wall.The harbor wall was known as The Cobb and was a well-known tourist attraction commonly used as a promenade. The edge of The Cobb was covered with algae and extremely slippery when wet. The claimant had crouched in the area affected by the algae to take a photo of his friends, when he slipped and fell off a 20 foot drop landing on rocks below. He brought an action based on the Occ upiers Liability Act 1957 arguing that no warning signs were present as to the dangers of slipping. Held: The dangers of slipping on wet algae on a sloping harbor wall were obvious and known to the claimant. Therefore there was no duty to warn. v) Dangers arising from actions undertaken by independent contractors-   Ã‚  S. 2(4)(b) Occupiers Liability Act 1957   An occupier is not liable for dangers created by independent contractors if  the occupier acted  reasonably in all the circumstances in entrusting the work to the independent contractor and took reasonable steps to satisfy himself that the  work carried out was  properly done and the contractor was competent. Ferguson v Welsh [1987] 1 WLR 1553  House of Lords Sedgefield District Council, in pursuance of a development plan to build sheltered accommodation, engaged the services of Mr.Spence to demolish a building. It was a term of the contract that the work was not to be sub-contracted out. In breach of this term, Mr. Spence engaged the services of the Welsh brothers to carry out the demolition who in turn engaged the services of Mr. Ferguson to assist. Mr. Ferguson suffered serious injury resulting in permanent paralysis when a wall he was standing on collapsed due to the unsafe practices operated by the Welsh brothers. He brought an action against the Council, Mr. Spence and the Welsh brothers. The trial judge held that the Welsh Brothers were liable but that Mr.Spence and the Council were not liable. Mr. Ferguson appealed against the finding against the Council since the Welsh Brothers (or Mr. Spence) had the funds or insurance to meet liability. Held: The appeal was dismissed. Mr. Ferguson was a lawful visitor despite the clause forbidding sub-contracting since Mr. Spence would have apparent or ostensible authority to invite him on to the land. However, the danger arose from the unsafe system of work adopted by the Welsh Brothers not the state of the premises. Whilst there was evidence t hat Mr.Spence had sub-contracted demolition work to those executing unsafe practices on  previous occasions, there was no evidence that the Council were aware of this. Gwilliam v West Hertfordshire Hospital NHS Trust [2002] EWCA Civ 1041  Court of Appeal The claimant, a 63 year old woman, was injured at a summer fair hosted by West Hertfordshire Hospital. She was injured whilst using a ‘splat wall’ whereby participants would bounce off a trampette against a wall and become attached to the wall by means of Velcro material. The injury occurred as a result of negligent set up of the equipment.The equipment was provided by  a business called ‘Club Entertainments’ who were an independent contractor engaged by the Hospital. Club Entertainment’s public liability insurance had expired four days before the incidence and thus they had no cover for the injury. They agreed to settle her claim for ? 5,000. Mrs. Gwilliam brought an action against the hospita l based on their failure to ensure that the entertainment arranged was covered by public liability insurance. She claimed the difference between the ? 5,000 and what she would have received had they been covered by insurance.Held: The Hospital owed a duty of care Under the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957 this duty did extend to checking whether the independent contractor had insurance cover since this would be relevant to whether they were competent. However, there was no breach of duty since the Hospital had enquired and had been told by Club Entertainment that they had insurance cover. There was no duty to inspect the insurance documents to ensure that cover was adequate. 4. 1. 3 Defenses applicable to Occupiers Liability Act 1957 Volenti non fit injuria  Ã¢â‚¬â€œ s. (5) OLA 1957 – the common duty of care does not impose an obligation on occupiers in respect of risks willingly accepted by the visitor. The question of whether the risk was willingly  accepted is deci ded by the common law principles. Contributory negligence – Damages may be reduced under the Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945 where the visitor fails to take reasonable care for their own safety. Exclusion of Liability   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã¢â‚¬â€œ s. 2(1) OLA 1957 allows an occupier to extend, restrict, exclude or modify his duty to visitors in so far as he is free to do so.White v Blackmore [1972] 3 WLR (discussed earlier) Where the occupier is a business the ability to exclude liability  is subject to the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 4. 1. 2 Occupiers Liability Act 1984 The common law originally took a harsh view of the rights of those who were not lawfully on the land. (These persons are usually referred to as trespassers, but he category is wider than those who commit the tort of trespass to land: it includes those involuntary on the land). The Occupiers Liability Act 1984 imposes a duty on occupiers in relation to persons ‘other than his visitors' (S. 1 (1 ) (a) OLA 1984).This  includes trespassers and those who exceed their permission. Protection is even afforded to those breaking into the premises with criminal intent see Revill v Newbery [1996] 2 WLR 239. Whilst it may at first appear harsh to impose a duty on occupiers for those that have come on to their land uninvited and without permission, liability was originally recognized at common law for child trespassers where the occupier was aware of the danger and aware that trespassers, including children would encounter the danger. British Railway Board v Herrington [1972] AC 877   overruling Addie v. Dumbreck [1929] AC 358.Addie v Dumbreck  [1929] AC 358  House of Lords the defendant owned View Park Colliery which was situated in a field adjacent to a road. There was a fence around the perimeter of the field although there were large gaps in the fence. The field was frequently used as a short cut to a railway station and children would use it as a playground. The defendant would often warn people off the land but the attempts were not effective and no real attempt was made to ensure that people did not come onto the land. A child came on to the land and was killed when he climbed onto a piece of haulage apparatus.Held: No duty of care was owed to trespassers to ensure that they were safe when coming onto the land. The only duty was not to inflict harm willfully. Viscount Dunedin: â€Å"In the present case, had the child been a licensee, I would have held the defenders liable; secus if the complainer had been an adult. But, if the person is a trespasser, then the only duty the proprietor has towards him is not maliciously to injure him; he may not shoot him; he may not set a spring gun, for that is just to arrange to shoot him without personally firing the shot.Other illustrations of what he may not do might be found, but they all come under the same head—injury either directly malicious or an acting so reckless as to be tantamount to malicious acting. † ‘Occupier' is given the same meaning as under the 1957 Act (S. 1 (2) OLA 1984). Since the Occupiers Liability Act 1984 applies to trespassers, a lower level of protection is offered. Hence the fact that  death and personal injury are the  only protected forms of damage and occupiers have no duty in relation to the property of trespassers. (S. 1 (8) OLA 1984). Also the duty only arises when certain risk factors are present. . 1. 2. 1 The circumstances giving rise to a duty of care S. 1 (3)  Occupiers Liability Act 1984 an occupier owes a duty to another (not being his visitor) if:   (a) He is aware of a the danger or has reasonable grounds to believe that it exists   (b) He knows or has reasonable grounds to believe the other is in the vicinity of the danger or may come into the vicinity of the danger   (c) The risk is one in which in all the  circumstances of the case, he may reasonably be expected to offer the other some protection If all three of these are present the occupier owes a duty of care to the non-lawful visitor.The criteria in s. 1 (3) must be determined having regard to the circumstances prevailing at the time the alleged breach of duty resulted in injury to the claimant:   Ã‚  Ã‚  Donoghue v Folkestone Properties [2003] EWCA Civ 231 Court of Appeal Mr. Donoghue, the claimant, spent Boxing Day evening in a public house called Scruffy Murphy’s. It was his intention, with some of his friends, to go for a midnight swim in the sea. Unfortunately in his haste to get into the water he dived from a slipway in Folkestone harbor owned by the defendant and struck his head on an underwater obstruction, breaking his neck.At his trial evidence was adduced to the affect that the slipway had often been used by others during the summer months to dive from. Security guards employed by the defendant had stopped people from diving although there were no warning signs put out. The obstruction that had injured the claiman t was a permanent feature of a grid-pile which was submerged under the water. In high tide this would not have posed a risk but when the tide went out it was a danger. The claimant’s action was based on the Occupiers Liability Act 1984. Mr. Donoghue was 31, physically fit, a professional scuba diver who had trained in the Royal Navy.It was part of his basic knowledge as a diver that he should check water levels and obstructions before diving. The trial judge found for the claimant but reduced the damages by 75% to reflect the extent to which he had failed to take care of his own safety under the Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945. The defendant appealed contending that in assessing whether a duty of care arises under s. 1(3) each of the criteria must be assessed by reference to the individual characteristics and attributes of the particular claimant and on the particular occasion when the incident in fact occurred i. . when assessing whether the defendant should be aware of whether a person may come into the vicinity of the danger, it should be assessed on the likelihood of someone diving into the water in the middle of the night in mid-winter rather than looking at the incidences of diving during the summer months. Held: Appeal allowed. The test of whether a duty of care exists under s. 1(3) Occupiers Liability Act 1984 must be determined having regard to the circumstances prevailing at the time of the alleged breach resulted in injury to the claimant. At the time Mr.Donoghue sustained his injury, Folkestone Properties had no reason to believe that he or anyone else would be swimming from the slipway. Consequently, the criteria set out in s. 1 (3) (b) was not satisfied and no duty of care arose. 4. 1. 2. 2 Standard of care S. 1 (4) OLA 1984 – the duty is to take such care as is reasonable in all the circumstances of the case to see that the other does not suffer injury on the premises by reason of the danger concerned. Revill v Newber y [1996] 2 WLR 239 Court of Appeal Mr. Newbery was a 76 year old man. He owned an allotment which had a shed in which he kept various valuable items.The shed was subject to frequent breaking and vandalism. Mr. Newbery had taken to sleeping in his shed armed with a 12 bore shot gun. Mr. Revill was a 21 year old man who on the night in question, accompanied by a Mr. Grainger, and went to the shed at 2. 00 am in order to break in. Mr. Newbery awoke, picked up the shot gun and fired it through a small hole in the door to the shed. The shot hit Mr. Revill in the arm. It passed right through the arm and entered his chest. Both parties were prosecuted for the criminal offences committed. Mr. Revill pleaded guilty and was sentenced. Mr. Newbery was acquitted of wounding. Mr.Revill brought a civil action against Mr. Newbery for the injuries he suffered. Mr. Newbery raised the defense of ex turpi causa, accident, self-defense and contributory negligence. Held: The Claimants action was success ful but his damages were reduced by 2/3 under the Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945 to reflect his responsibility for his own injuries. On the application of ex turpi causa Neill LJ: â€Å"For the purposes of the present judgment I do not find it necessary to consider further the joint criminal enterprise cases or the application of the doctrine of ex turpi causa in other areas of the law of tort.It is sufficient for me to confine my attention to the liability of someone in the position of Mr. Newbery towards an intruding burglar. It seems to me to be clear that, by enacting section 1 of the 1984 Act, Parliament has decided that an occupier cannot treat a burglar as an outlaw and has defined the scope of the duty owed to him. As I have already indicated, a person other than an occupier owes a similar duty to an intruder such as Mr. Revill. In paragraph 32 of their 1976 Report the Law Commission rejected the suggestion that there should be no duty at all owed to a trespa sser who was engaged in a serious criminal enterprise. Ratcliff v McConnell and Harper Adams College [1997] EWCA Civ 2679  Ã‚   Court of Appeal The claimant was a student at Harper Adams College. One night he had been out drinking with friends on campus and they decided they would go for a swim in the college pool which was 100 yards from the student bar. They climbed over a locked gate into the open air swimming pool. The pool had a notice at the entrance which stated the pool would be locked and its use prohibited between the hours of 10pm -6. 30am.There was a notice at the shallow end in red on a White background stating ‘Shallow end’ and a notice at the deep end stating ‘Deep end, shallow dive’. However, the boys did not see the signs because there was no light. The three boys undressed. The claimant put his toe in the water to test the temperature and then the three of them lined up along the side of the pool and dived in. Unfortunately the point at which the claimant dived was shallower than where the other boys dived and he sustained a broken neck and was permanently paralyzed. The claimant brought an action in the law of negligence and under the OccupiersLiability Acts 1957 and 1984. The trial judge held that the claimant was a trespasser since he was not permitted to go into the pool and that the College owed a duty of care under the 1984 Act since the pool had often been used by students in the prohibited hours so the College should have been aware that the claimant was within a class of persons who may come into the danger. The breach was in not taking more preventative action to prevent use of the pool. The claimant’s damages were, however, reduced by 60% under the Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945.The defendants appealed contending the evidence relied on by the claimant in terms of repeated trespass all took place before 1990 before they started locking the gates. Held: The appeal was allowed. The cla imant was not entitled to compensation. The defendant had taken greater steps to reduce trespass by students since 1990. The only incidence of trespass to the pool in the four years prior to the claimant’s injury, related to students from a visiting college and therefore there was no reason for the college to suspect the students had come into the danger so no duty of care arose under s. (3) (b) Occupiers Liability Act 1984. Also the trial judge had incorrectly identified the danger. The pool itself was not dangerous it was the activity of diving into it which was unsafe. This was an obvious danger to which there was no duty to warn. By surrounding the pool with a 7 foot high fence, a locked gate and a prohibition on use of the pool in the stated hours the College had offered a reasonable level of protection. The duty may be discharged by giving a warning or discouraging others from taking the risk S. (5) Occupiers Liability Act 1984 – note there is no obligation in re lation to the warning to enable the visitor to be reasonably safe – contrast the provision under the 1957 Act. Tomlinson v. Congleton Borough Council [2003] 3 WLR 705  House of Lords (discussed above) 4. 1. 2. 3  Defenses Volenti non fit Injuria – s. 1 (6) OLA 1984 – no duty of care is owed in respect of risks willingly accepted by the visitor. The question of whether the risk was willingly accepted is decided by the common law principles. Contributory negligence – Damages may be reduced under the Law Reform Contributory Negligence) Act 1945 where the visitor fails to take reasonable care for their own safety. Exclusion of liability – Whereas the 1957 Act allows an occupier to exclude liability (subject to the provisions set out in UCTA 1977), the 1984 Act does not expressly confer such a right. This may be an oversight by the legislature and it may be possible to exclude liability since it is not expressly forbidden or it may be that the legis lature  was of the opinion  that it should not be possible to exclude liability for the basic level of protection afforded to trespassers. . 2 Liability for Manufacturers The narrow rule in Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] AC 562 recognizes that manufacturers owed a duty of care to ultimate consumers of the manufactured products. Over the years this duty was extended and refined and took on in practice some of the characteristics of strict liability. Parliament has now imposed such a strict liability on manufacturers under the Consumer Protection Act 1997.Although this act does not expressly have effect in place of the rules of common law( in the way that the Occupiers’ Liability Act do, in practice it affords more satisfactory remedies , and the narrow rule in Donoghue v Stevenson need no longer be studied in detail. 4. 3 Liability for employers An employee injured at work has three possible actions against the employer. i) An action in negligence for breach of the employerâ €™s duty of care. This is the concern this chapter ii) An action for breach of statutory duties imposed by parliament on the employer. The principles of the tort of breach of statutory duty will be explained later.The content of the various regulations prescribing safety equipments, clothing, procedures and so forth fall outside the syllabus and are part of a specialist course in employment law. iii) The employer may be vicariously liable for the torts committed by another employee. The principle of and the justifications for vicarious liability will be explained in detail later. For the present if is enough to note that an employer (even if not personally at fault) is in law answerable for the torts committed by employees in the course of their employment. The inter- relation between these actions is of some interest.Before 1948 an action based on vicarious liability was not available because of the doctrine of ‘common employment’. If A, an employee of X Ltd, tortu ously injured B, another employee of X ltd, then X Ltd would be liable to C, but not to B, because A and B were in the ‘common employment’ of X ltd. This doctrine provided protection for the employer against possible expensive tort claims. To offset this however the courts (a) modified the common law negligence action in a way that favored the employee and (b) permitted civil action for damages to be brought for breaches of safety regulations.The doctrine of common employment was abolished by statutes in 1948(Law Reform (Personal Injuries) Act 1948. So employees now have a vicarious liability claim and also the benefit of the modified common law action and actions for breach of statutory duty. The Nature of the Common Law Action The employer’s common law duty of care differs from the ordinary duty of care. It is said to be ‘non-delegable’. This is most clearly explained by Lord Hailsham of St Maryleborne in McDermid v Nash Dredging[1987] AC 906 as fo llows this special sense does not involve the proposition that the duty cannot be delegated in the sense that it is incapable of being the subject of delegation, but only that the employer cannot escape liability if the duty has been delegated and then not properly performed’. The facts of the case were that M was employed as a deckhand, by the defendants, but was sent by them to work on a ship operated by a different company (in fact the parent company of the defendants). He was seriously injured when the captain of the ship (not an employee of the defendants) carelessly operated the safety systems.The defendants were liable because their duty had been delegated to the employees of the parent company and not properly performed. Details of this area would be discussed when looking at vicarious liability. But in summary it is worth noting that employers owe a duty of care to their employees, but this duty is different in nature from the normal duty of care, being described as non-delegable. Court are now developing principles under which employees can also recover for the effects of work related stress. ==================================END========================================

Wednesday, August 28, 2019

The Detrimental affects of the internet on young minds Research Proposal

The Detrimental affects of the internet on young minds - Research Proposal Example Many young people, having grown up with online friends, seem to have lost the ability to discern the difference between real and virtual. What kind of effect would this have on their real-world relationships? The prevalence of real-time role-playing games shared with friends over the always-on internet connection blurs this boundary between the real world environment and the imagined world to an even greater degree. What effect would this have on a young person’s concepts of the real? How would the combined effects of warped real-world relationships and warped concepts of real-world environment function to shape the young person’s perception of life or development of a world-view? As this field is a relatively new one, it is imagined that there is not a lot of research available yet on these topics. The present research is thus designed to discover if these types of negative effects of internet use are truly manifest within this first generation. Rather than attempting to lead the research with these questions specifically in mind, the goal of the present investigation will be to explore the central question of what are the detrimental effects of the internet on young minds as identified by professionals and as recognized by young people? To gain answers to the research question, a search of available literature on the topic will be conducted. The purpose of starting with the literature review is to understand what has been written on the topic already and to determine whether previous research supports my hypotheses regarding the detrimental effects of the internet on a young person’s mind. From this vantage point, the next stage of the research will be to develop a survey to distribute among professional psychologists and counselors who work on a regular basis with young people and a survey to distribute among young people.

Tuesday, August 27, 2019

Feasibility Study Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Feasibility Study - Essay Example As a direct function of this, a litany of different programs and initiatives have been discussed and analyzed as a means of promoting health and healthful living to these young members of society. It has become painfully evident within the past several years that school programs alone art ineffective as a means of promoting such a change. In such a way, it is the belief and recommendation of this particular author that one of the most successful means by which a reduction in childhood obesity can be accomplished is with regards to utilizing many of the government owned and community operated playgrounds and parks as community centers that during key times of the week offer play activities, exercise, and help instruction to both parents and their children as a means of seeking to affect a positive influence upon the overall level of obesity that is noted within current society. Establishment of Feasibility: Ultimately, the low startup cost that is engendered with regards to the specif ic plan is one of the reasons that make it highly feasible for startup. Moreover, as the facilities already exist within the extant environment, it is not necessary for such a program to purchase and/or outfit a new or existing facility as a means of hosting such programs/courses (Landow & Ebdon, 2012). Furthermore, as has been mentioned briefly in the introduction, the overall need and demand for such programs has only increased as the overall incidence of childhood and adolescent obesity has subsequently increase within the environment. Accordingly, from a cursory overview of existing programs, both state and private, it can be inferred that a deficit in supply for such programs exists within the current market as compared to the demand. Naturally, the overall feasibility goes far beyond the place required to perform such programs and/or the level of interest that might be exhibited within the community (Liessmann, 1987). A litany of other startup costs and potential problems that must be face will be discussed in a certain level of length within the preceding sections. Competitor Analysis: One unique factor of the current market with regards to programs specifically targeting the exercise and health of adolescent to struggle with obesity is the fact that these almost invariably leverage government funding and operate as a public partnership. Although such a business model almost invariably defines the current market, it is the belief of this analysis that a public/private partnership could effectively leverage many of the existing strengths of current demand without necessarily reducing the overall level of demand that might be exhibited. Whereas the broad majority of these programs for public, private entities of also sought to engage with the need that is been reference; however, the degree and extent to which this unable to be accomplished has been limited due to the aforementioned limiting factors of purchasing a specific place and outfitting it to meet the needs of the stakeholders concerned. Financing One particular aspect of the public-private partnership that has been discussed above which will be beneficial is with regards to the issue of financing. Previous ventures into this field have noted that it is difficult if not impossible to achieve a level of sufficient funding based solely upon the

Monday, August 26, 2019

Advertising and public relations Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2250 words

Advertising and public relations - Essay Example In relation to the present global business environment, it can frequently be observed that marketing activities along with Public Relations (PR) are concurrently deemed as a major focused area. In relation to the various observations from different scholars, it can be said that PR is one of the major, effective as well as versatile tools of marketing communication which enables to enhance the efficiency of each marketing activity. It can be executed both in the internal as well as in the external environment of the organisation. According to the present day context, advertising can be regarded as one of the major marketing activities, which frequently involves various functions of PR. It is increasingly observed that the organisations in the present business environment have become quite prone to face different PR related issues in terms of executing campaigns for their products within the global markets (Zerfass & Duhring, 2012). Emphasising upon the major influence or impact of PR in the advertising and other product campaign activities, the main objective of this report is to discuss an issue which was raised by Greenpeace with the aid of a PR campaign against Nestle. The product which had been focused upon in the PR campaign was Kit Kat, a leading product offering of Nestle. The assault on the established brand of Kit Kat occurred in the year 2010 (Greenpeace, n.d.). Consequently, based on the assessment of the situation faced by Nestle (especially Kit Kat brand) due to the PR campaign, the discussion of this report will be focused on developing an effective PR strategy which can enable Kit Kat to efficiently address different PR concerning issues. Moreover, the discussion in this report will further focus on developing methods of evaluating the PR plan for Kit Kat in the respective area or market. Situational Analysis In relation to the PR issue that was faced by Kit Kat, a globally well-known product of Nestle, it has been observed that Greenpeace, an org anisation which acted as a pressure group, depicted the rather dismal state of affairs which was surrounding behind the gleam and shine of a widely preferred product such as Kit Kat (Shreeves, 2010). Through the dynamic PR campaign, Greenpeace wanted to depict that Kit Kat, a renowned product of Nestle family includes a higher usage of palm oil which is generally derived from Indonesian rain forests, resulting in significant deforestation. The extensive use of palm oil by the company has been significantly threatening the livelihood of the local people in places such as Indonesia as well as it is also drastically endangering inhabitants such as orang-utan towards destruction (Guardian News and Media Limited, 2013). In this regard, the extensive use of palm oil or continuous deforestation initiatives of Nestle has been criticised by Greenpeace. Therefore, in order to take immediate measures towards the deforestation initiatives, Nestle has developed its business plan which ensures to take away the suppliers or companies from its supply chain that are likely to practice deforestation (Greenpeace, n.d.). Greenpeace can be considered as one of the major non-profit organisations, which tends to protect natural environment from a range of organisational activities. Greenpeace is considerably focusing on alleviating numerous issues with regard to different environmental concerns that include global

Case Study on Ontology Languages Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words

Case Study on Ontology Languages - Essay Example 20/Jul/2006 J B Conrad Semantic web creation conrad@xyz.com DAML+OIL: http://www.xyz.com J B Conrad conrad@xyz.com Semantic Web Creation May OWL: Comparison of the...While these languages represent the specifications for the Ontology, they do not represent the real programming languages that are employed like CycL, Ontolingua, F-Logic, etc., 1. XML: This uses a standard syntax laid down already by the W3C. The code is crisp and easy to write. The DTD can be defined the way it is required. However, this does not offer the flexibility of defining standard classes and then making use of the similar structure repeatedly. XML is easy to use in a program though of course, creating XML data which will have semantics in them is not possible with the existing structure of XML. 2. XOL on the other hand, offers all those features that are present in XML as well as in OIL. XOL employs modelling primitives that are in line with OKBC standards. This is based on XML and uses Ontologies to extend the features. Therefore, it is found that the language is supporting some of the insufficiencies in XML like standard class definition and other structure definitions. With these, the data gets verified and the mistakes in the data are avoided. In addition to these, this also supports extensive slot hierarchies. But however, it does not allow definition of relationships extensively. This makes it a weak relationship modeller. XOL is comfortable where only data is to be represented without any major relationship criterion which is hard to find in knowledge systems. 3.

Sunday, August 25, 2019

Change Paper Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Change Paper - Essay Example changes its overall strategy for success, adds or removes a major section or practice, and/or wants to change the very nature by which it operates† (McNamara, 2009). This paper briefly explains an event in which the organization and the personnel experience change and various steps taken for reaching the goal. I worked in an advertising agency for about 10 years in Dubai as a Production Manager. We failed to meet the deadlines quite often even though we had enough employees and facilities. We have handled reputed brands like PepsiCo, Coca Cola, Unilever, Reckit & Colman like famous international brands and for them timely delivery of goods with highest possible quality was a must. Even though we had increased our manpower and other facilities, still we were unable to meet the deadlines because of the negative passive attitudes of the workers. We decided to implement a complete change in our organization after a top level meeting. We have achieved major breakthroughs in the volume of production after the change was implemented. Workers started work hard to increase their productivity. The quality was never compromised at the expense of quantity. We have started to deliver goods well before the schedules which increased the trust of our clients and business has risen in huge proposition as we forced to open two more production units in Dubai itself. As a Production Manager, even though my responsibilities have increased, I enjoyed the work a lot because of the rewards given to me by the company. My organization promoted me as the General Manager of productions and has given three production managers under by control in order to look after the production matters of the three units we had in Dubai. Change was visible everywhere inside my organization. Workers avoided taking unnecessary leaves and they started to punch their cards well before the start of production. The reputation of the organization has increased a lot so that we started to get several

Saturday, August 24, 2019

Failure or success Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Failure or success - Essay Example Gatto’s opinion on the effects of schooling is extremely intense. In â€Å"Against School†, he stirs up a discussion on whether ‘boredom’ is the perfect term to describe the experience of modern day students. From his personal experience, most students feel bored with the education system and think their teachers do not seem to understand their subjects and probably aren’t interested in learning more (Breton and Largent 25). Gatto brings up the question of who should be blamed for the critical mess in the education system. Ideally, teachers often appear bored and keep blaming their students for feeling disinterested in taking their studies seriously (Breton and Largent 157). He offers a solution to boredom and encourages students to amuse themselves in the classroom. Also, he encourages teachers to provide students with adequate education rather than stirring regular schooling. Gatto also scrutinizes whether the existing school system is meant to spearhead forced schooling. He goes ahead to compare the school system to the Prussian culture and refers to it as an educational system that is meant to nurture mediocre intellects. With such an educational system, students are denied the opportunity to develop appreciable leadership skills. Also, he states that most people connect ‘successes to ‘schooling’. According to him, important people like Benjamin Franklin, George Washington, Abraham Lincoln and Thomas Jefferson never subjected their lives to the strenuous schooling system, but still made it in life (Breton and Largent 241). In addition, Gatto believes that schools were designed to make good citizens at their personal best. Gatto thinks that the public school system is designed to fulfill the major covert functions of a school. He outlines the covert functions by revisiting Alexander Inglis’s basic functions of a modern school.

Friday, August 23, 2019

Project Analysis Part III Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Project Analysis Part III - Essay Example Therefore, each company now desires to implement latest technology to interact with its customers to better improve their product quality and hence sales. In this era of extreme competition, everyone wants to get response in-time which is being achieved by implementing customer relationship management (CRM) softwares. These softwares are provided by salesforce.com or Microsoft dynamics CRM. Large enterprise systems have been using CRM from long before but now technology improved a lot and this system is applicable by almost all companies(Chen & Popovich, 2003). Now all enterprise levels can easily implement customer relationship softwares to directly communicate with their users and take feedback of their newly launched as well as upcoming products. 2.0 Cloud Computing With the advent of cloud computing technology, computation has become more convenient and usage of technology is cheaper. Cloud computing has allowed industries to expand their business based on hardware as well as sof tware, at even low costs than ever before. Now industrialists need not to pay expensive computer systems and networking complexities; rather they simply need to make their own network on cloud and pay little for that. Nowadays, cloud computing is extensively being used for implementing CRM in most of the companies. This results in low cost implementation of CRM yet effective. Cloud system is provided with state of the art user friendly setup with the ease of usage as well as provides extensive productive system. Although usage of cloud computing technology is getting fame day by day but still it is having some flaws. While making use of cloud technology for Warnaco group, one threat could be non-reliability of cloud data as this data can be accessed by anybody on the public network. This threat can be overcome by implementing private cloud rather than public(Rittinghouse & Ransome, 2010). Therefore, Warnaco could made use of private cloud technology where sensitive data as CRM, can be saved with greater security and control. 2.1 Cloud CRM and Warnaco CRM is specialized software that helps organization keeping record of all of its constituents. In case of Warnaco group, this software is to be implemented for keeping track of company’s user profile, their purchasing power, views and reviews of latest and upcoming products, letting employees keep record of latest suggestion and much more. Cloud CRM makes use of data centers that are owned or rented by the CRM providers over the internet and can be accessed on one’s desktop. 2.2 Compact System Cloud CRM, unlike traditional costly and complex CRM systems, are much convenient to be used. They need not to own multiple licenses and complex hardware installations including high costs. Also cloud CRM provides flexibility in the number of users who want to access the database; rather than specific number of users, followed by additional charges for increase in users as in traditional systems. Therefore, clo ud computing is good to be used for implementing CRM in Warnaco as this company is having ever-growing business with frequent variation in the number of users accessing database of the company. Also Warnaco is having branches all over the country; this helps employees to connect to database remotely from an office server. Also, cloud networks are hosted by their own vendors who keep track of bugs and updates and provide timely fixes for them. 2.3 Hardware Requirement for Cloud CRM Cloud CRM is actually hosted at remote locations therefore,

Thursday, August 22, 2019

Reasons for applying to Boston University and personal experience Essay Example for Free

Reasons for applying to Boston University and personal experience Essay This is an important point in life that would perhaps provide me with the capacity to develop personal reformation. It is a comparative outlay of the epochs that have defined my life. I am aged twenty-seven with a great affiliation of developing a more rational and attractive imagery that blends me with the capacity of a better societal model. This is an important step however much it came at such a time in my life. However, the same has been catalyzed by the affliction and passive rejection from my family. At my early days in school, my character and personality was never straight forward, an impression that downplayed a poor education qualification. At the plane of the outlook of my family, my siblings have continued to request me go back to finish my education. Occasionally, my grandmother was a special icon in sensitizing a better state of reformation. Her long trailing motivation in completing my studies however came to an end after her death from cancer. This was such a big stumbling block in my future conception at school compounding that I was deeply held at work for helping my family. With such a norm, the transition from working at my age to going back to school remained however difficult. Elsewhere, my family considered it more rational to working than going back to complete my studies. At high school, I was an average student who tirelessly worked hard and managed to get between A’s and C’s. However, my dreams went surging after failing to complete my studies. However, I now want to join your university for adequate completion of my studies so as to achieve such dreams. The conception of developing my character and personality however necessitated my going back to school where I enrolled at Massachusetts Bay Community College. Such a transition was not a simple attribute but its cost equaled great sacrifice and personal contribution. In the due process of recapturing my educational etiquette however, I found myself with a learning disability. This was yet a drawback in the circumstances. This disability went over providing my incapacity to meet the challenge I met when I chose to attend one of the information sessions at Boston University. Coupled with all this life achievements however, I would like to apply for finishing up my education at your University (Boston University) To me, this is a great opportunity that will offer me a chance to have a cementing effect from the personality drawbacks that characterizes my life. Your university is amongst the best in the country with a diverse educational reputation. Either, its adequate perception of a wide flexibility in student learning and environment gives the pleasure to seek admission in this university. I have fountain knowledge in lieu of what the university can offer to safeguard my interest. I am a well-modeled and behaved person who has the capacity of adhering to the required values and requirements in your university. Either, I have a collaborative attribute where I will be adequately able to interact with the various structures and persons in the university. Given the chance, I will understand therefore to have the role and obligation of following the candid stipulations and requirement which safeguards every student’s threshold at the university. I greatly promise to fully abide by the regulatory dispensation which is the basic outlay of interactive limitations with the different parties and structures within the institution.

Wednesday, August 21, 2019

The Kite Runner Essay Example for Free

The Kite Runner Essay When one makes the transition from child to adult, they must make the decision to either adopt the traits they have developed, or to see fault and change the problems before the time to do so has past. It takes strength to use the positive traits one possesses, and it takes even more strength to assess the negative traits and emancipate the positive ones. Alan Alda (American actor) once said that â€Å"You have to leave the city of your comfort and go into the wilderness of your intuition. What youll discover will be wonderful. What youll discover is yourself. † Before death, a person needs to break their boundaries, and find the security of knowing their identity, otherwise one could go through an entire life, learning all they could about life; but forgetting all about their self. Another key factor influencing our personality is our environment. A society constantly changing for the worse is no place for a person to grow or reside. In Khaled Hosseini’s â€Å"the Kite Runner†, Afghanistan is a place of ethnic differentiation, civil war and darkness. Amir, Baba, and Hassan’s identities, are all examples of different ways a person’s personality and conscience could develop in this oppressive time in Afghanistan’s history. Amir finds peace in who he is through great mental anguish and dangerous decisions, Baba’s weak traits are discovered, and Hassan manages to preserve his Good Samaritan lifestyle whilst fighting off the turmoil’s of being a Hazara boy. The Kite Runner focuses mainly on the themes of identity and self-actualization. Amir from the beginning of the novel was never perfect in the eyes of his father, Baba. During Rahim Khans visit early in the story, Amir overhears Baba speaking about how Amir is weak and disappointing, that â€Å"a boy who cannot stand up for himself becomes a man who cannot stand up for anything. †(24) This is an important quote, because it first introduces Amir’s most dominant trait through his childhood, his cowardice. Baba’s reluctance to praise Amir stems from Baba’s disbelief in his courage. Amir quite often was defended by Hassan in times of trouble, whether the cause was Assef or not. Then when it was Hassan who was in need, Amir was over shrouded by his fear. Amir had felt guilt until his arrival in Pakistan. â€Å"â€Å"That was a long time ago, but it’s wrong what they say about the past, I’ve learned, about how you can bury it. Because the past claws its way out. Looking back now, I realize I have been peeking into that deserted alley for the last twenty-six years. † (1) Amir made the decision to save Sohrab from the Taliban (Assef) was the moment in his life, where he finally felt at peace. Saving Sohrab was his way of gaining up the courage to save Hassan. After the rescue of Sohrab, Amir’s conscience had cleared and he could finally live his life. Amir’s passion for literature was another example of his self-actualization. He would always read to Hassan, due to Hassan’s illiteracy. Amir wished in the future to pursue a degree in English, but this idea was hastily dismissed by Baba and Amir began growing to a man with even less confidence. Amir pondered the thoughts of his father resenting him, which at a young age is a terrible burden for him to hold. The evidence of this hate was displayed in Amir’s face, and as a young child, he is not intelligent enough to realize his father’s love, and it bothered him greatly. Rahim Khan seemed to be the only adult in Amir’s life who supported the idea of his future in literature. He would read, and show great interest in Amir’s story’s; as well as instill hope in Amir with positive feedback. Rahim Khan was the spark that ignited the ever burning flame of Amir’s literary passion. To the reader early on, Baba is the epitome of a man. He is introduced as a man that will stand up for his loved ones, whether it’s a life or death situation. He speaks of Amir like he has no courage whatsoever, which gives the reader some idea of how much Baba values doing the right thing. When Baba and Amir flee Kabul, Baba risks his life to prevent the rape of a woman he doesn’t even know. This drastic act of courage and compassion for his fellow man is inspiring and sets the moral bar for Baba very high. When Amir arrives in Pakistan, he is distraught at the news he hears from Rahim Khan regarding Hassan being his half-brother and Baba’s son. Amir now knows, that the pain he felt from Baba’s resentment was purely a byproduct of the pain Baba feels about Hassan. Baba’s character takes a moral blow in the view of the reader, and to many it never recovers. After hearing of the news, Amir’s betrayal of Hassan is now very reminiscent of his father’s; showing more similarity between them than known before. Amir now knows, Baba’s resentment, was him showing he is too weak to be known as the man who slept with a Hazara. Baba tells Amir in chapter 3 that â€Å"there is only one sin, only one. And that is theft. Every other sin is a variation of theft. †(19) it’s ironic that Baba says this because he stole Ali’s honor, Amir’s right to a brother, and Hassan’s identity. While all the drastic self-realization of the characters was taking place, Hassan, managed to keep his same and ideal identity. Hassan was righteous and strong, the ideal symbol of the Muslim Religion and every other; to be pure and good. Amir’s resentment towards Hassan after his rape by Assef did not faze Hassan a bit. Hassan was almost too pure to feel any remorse towards Amir, they grew up together, and Amir was his best friend. Even after Amir had lied to Baba to expel Ali and Hassan from their home, Hassan felt no different towards them. He cared for their home while they resided in America; he even stayed in his and Ali’s same hut rather than the house to show respect. His loyalties to Amir and Baba stayed faithful until his death in the very home that he was practically raised in. He said he was caring for it for a friend, and the Taliban called him a liar like all Hazara’s, and killed him in the streets, as well as his wife. Amir might have made different choices in his life had he not plotted to make Hassan and Ali leave, but amidst the cowardice shown by both Amir and Baba, appeared a boy with the morals of an angel. No one can live life without realizing their true identity, and as the story ends; the characters take with them new traits, good or bad. Amir realizes his purpose in life, and he saved a life in the process of discovery of his own identity. Baba is reviled to be similar to a great dam with a crack, viewed as great and powerful, but in turn; the final view of him is weaker than the original opinion of the reader. Hassan through turmoil, conflict, and resentment, stayed true to himself and stayed loyal till his death. One could learn all there is to know, but without knowing their true identity, it is a life not lived.