ASSIGNMENT
Introduction:
Working in a hotel or being responsible for lawful visitors within the hotel requires huge responsibilities and rules in order to take control of organizations assets. In most cases a tort law is very necessary to have in mind, a tort law refers to in common law jurisdictions, is a wrong which absorb contravene of a civil duty (rather than a contractual duty) owed to someone else. It makes distinction from a crime, which involves a breach of duty owed to the public in common. However being familiar with legal duties and legal liabilities of innkeepers and occupiers liability is the key of achievement of organizations goals. Responsibility of the persons or legal entities is called legal duties which abide by rules and regulations of the law to maintain constitutional rights of its citizens. From the perspective view of innkeepers legal duty is taking the responsibility of both employees and customers understanding them by creating safe environment inside the hotel and taking responsibility for them at all. Firstly the duty of innkeeper is to ensure premises (accommodations) are harmless and satisfactory for the purpose and must be prepared even for any foreseeable danger. For the safeness of accommodation purpose the Temperature, Ventilation, Lighting, Sanitation, Water, and First Aid must be checked and controlled all the time. The duty of care is considered as legal obligation in tort law and introduced to an individual requiring that they stick to a standard of reasonable care during and implementing any acts that might be predicted to harm others. The duty of care can be implemented or introduced by operation of law within individuals without having current direction to relationship (familial, or contractual or otherwise) and mostly becomes linked to some cases. In law, an organization or person assumed to be lawfully liable when they are by financially or legally responsible for something. Inside the hotel the innkeeper is legally in charge for internal and external customers wrong dealings to others within the hotel. Legal liability defined in hospitality as legal responsibility of top manager or employer within the hotel or organization for everyones actions, damages and compensations. The innkeeper is financially liable for these who have injured or died at the hotel relating to some cases. For example: The housekeeper cleaned the hotel room and forgot to clean spilled water inside the bath room. The customer who is a lawful visitor enters the room and falls down on a bath floor breaks her arm and gets damage. In this case the person has the right to sue the innkeeper not the housekeeper by applying to the occupiers liability Acts 1957 or 1984 and some other Acts. Because innkeeper who has more money comparing to housekeeper, able to compensate the injured person. Usually compensation for damages resolves issues in many cases. Occupiers liability is one of the main subjects of tort law, codified in law which aspects the duty of care for who occupy real property be in debt to people who lawfully visit or trespass. Occupiers liability from the occupiers perspective view generally deals with liability which arises due to defective or dangerous condition of the premises. In common law there is no responsibility for landowners to other persons who offended while passing over or through their land. Progressively the English courts have developed tripartite structure as a result of such torts which are trespassers, licensees and invitees which are participants to land. Trespasser defined as encroaching on a property without the permission of the owner however trespasser becomes law breaker in this case. Trespasser who ignores signs as staff only, Private, or No entry. Coming to nowadays trespasser has a right to sue the landowner not less than lawfully visitor. Licensee and Invitee are the people who are legally invited for some purposes and the owner of the land is liable for any harm to the invitee and licensee, however both of them are lawful visitors. The act provides that the occupier must be prepared for children to less careful than adults. The Occupier would not be liable for individual contractor, however they had exercised reasonable care
and they have self skills or ability to maintain or to carry on their work as being professional at their work. Occupiers duty is to select or decide whether which contractor is more liable to his/her job comparing to other individual contractors as well. Occupiers are liable for these who get injuries or harms due to their employees of the hotel. Vicarious Liability is the responsibility to the third party by financially, who has been injured by reason of employee of the hotel and who has the right to sue employer of the hotel. Under the respondent superior doctrine, the employers are vicariously liable for some acts by their employees. In many circumstances employees told what to do by their employers and by doing that employees may not be responsible for any issues to their customers at all. The employees detour and frolic are decided by courts sometimes. The detour refers to employers liability for employees acting in a case whether he/she is right or wrong. Because he/she is acting/doing the way employer told to do. The frolic refers to employee did from his/her own knowledge or wants during the process of job rather than doing what employer told to do. In this case the employer is not liable to his/her employee. The breach of duty is considered when individuals (customers) rights are breached by another individual (employer) or an organization where occupiers owe liability. The breach of duty of an individual mostly recognized as the breach of customers rights, which can lead to negligence. The breach of duty is the breach of act in tort law. The restaurant owes a duty for his/her customers and he/she is liable for the safeness of the food, and in care of the customers inside the restaurant area. For example: If the food is spoiled or the chair is almost broken when customer gets injuries sitting or eating a food in a restaurant, this will lead to negligence. Mostly negligence will lead to failure on reasonable care to its invitees, licensees, and trespassers due to breach of duty. If the danger is foreseeable to hotels member he/she should immediately must solve the issue and apply decision about the issue immediately.
Each chapter consists of the articles that states the rules that carrier should follow. For example, in Article 22 in Chapter 3 it is stated that the liability of the carrier for each passenger is limited to 125 000 francs. This means that equivalent of capital value should not exceed 125 000 francs. The sum can be paid periodically by parts. However by special contract the sum of payment to passenger can be higher. In Article 5 it is stated that each of carrier of goods has got the right to claim the consignor to compose and hand over to him a document called an "air consignment note"; each of consignor has got the right to claim the carrier to accept this document. It means that without this document the contract between carrier and consignor loosing its force.
For personal injury to or the death of a consumer of a carriage, limit of liability is set at 46,666 Special Drawing Rights (SDR is supplementary international exchange reserve assets determined by the International Monetary Fund) per carriage. The 2002 Protocol, when it became legal, will set up compulsory insurance to cover passengers on ships and largely lift those limits to 250,000 SDR per passenger on every distinct occasion. There is also a limitation of liability of a carrier. The carrier under the Convention (Athens) is given the right to limit his liability. Article 7 represents that the maximum liability of the carrier for injury to a passenger is 175,000 SDR (about C$273,000).
Conclusion
First of all we have got a desire to say that law relating to accommodation was the task where we could get many ideas and information. This task requested us to give the definitions of legal duty, liability, and negligence. We did our best and we hope the acquired knowledge will help us during the final exam. In order to conclude, we want to notice that the entire work that has been done by us was great informational contribution for us and for our future. We have decided to do everything
together not to share the tasks and this brought us a best results. We have researched the Warsaw Convention, The Athens Convention and the laws relating to road and rail and we understood what the conventions are stated for and the significant importance of road and rail in terms of carriage of passengers.
REFERENCES:
Deakin, Johnston and Markesinis (2008). Markesinis & Deakin's Tort Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-928246-3. Mark Lunney, Ken Oliphant, Tort Law - Texts, Cases (2003) 2nd Ed. Oxford University Press, ISBN 0-19-926055-9 Caparo Industries plc v Dickman [1990] 2 AC 605 "Occupiers' Liability Act, 1995". Irish Statute Book. Oireachtas. 17 June 1995. Retrieved 2009-1016. Bozzi v. Nordstrom, Inc., 186 Cal. App. 4th 755 (2010). Parsons v. Crown Disposal Co., 15 Cal. 4th 456 (1997). Glasgow Corporation v Taylor [1922] 1 AC 44 Robert Addie & Sons (Colliery) Ltd v Dumbreck [1929] AC 358 Phipps v Rochester Corporation [1955] 1 QB 450 "Negligence". Encyclopedia Britannica. Meriam Webster. Retrieved 6/12/2011. Feinman, Jay (2010). Law 101. New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978019539513-6. Roe v Minister of Health (1954) 2 AER 131 Topic: Introduction 1 Laws relating to accommodation services 2a International Carriage by Air Warsaw Convention Safety on board aircraft 2 International Carriage by Sea, Rail, Road b Athens Convention International Conventions Law relating to carriage by Road [this can be takes from Uzbek law] Conclusion Name of Team Member responsible ALL ZIYOVUDDIN, LEONID LEONID, KENAN, ZIYOVUDDIN ZIYOVUDDIN, LEONID KHAYRIDDIN
ALL