Australian Safeway Stores Pty Ltd v Zaluzna - Case Study Example

When the facts indicate some negligence (eg. a snail in a bottle), the consumer does not have to prove how the manufacturer was negligent. The manufacturer has to prove that it did meet the standard of care.Based on the above Sarah has every right to take action against Cameron. She can sue Cameron in the court of law. Sarah's physical injuries caused by wearing the t-shirt resulted in her cancellation of a major movie contract. This was only because of the negligence on the part of Cameron who sold the t-shirt.

Sarah also has the right to claim for emotional distress. The law says that if emotional distress causes physical injury in this case (Sarah's skin rashes) then the claimant who suffered emotional distress can make a claim.3. Issues of the case:The gasfitter knowingly did damage to the pipeline of the hotel.Action:Sam can take legal action against the gasfitter. He can sue the gasfitter in the court of law and can also claim damages for negligence caused by him. Sam due to the negligence of the gasfitter had lost around $80,000 because it took 8 days to start the business after the gasfitter had tampered with his gasoline. 5. Sam the hotel owner had filed a claim for damages with her insurance company.

In this case, the insurance company has every right to deny her claim because it is evident that Sam has been inviting trouble from the whale rights activists 'Dignity for Whales'. She went against the law by selling whale meat.Sam had renewed the insurance policy and there was a contract with him and the insurance company. The insurance company cannot deny the claim. But since Sam had invited the damages she has no right to claim.With regard to the second attack, from the problem, it is not clear as to why his hotel was attacked for the second time.

Probably if she had carried on to serve whale meat then she has no right to claim. But if Sam had not continued serving whale meat then he has a right to claim from the insurance company.6. Issues of the case:Cameron suffered a loss of her stock due to fire. She had lost 95% of her stock but the insurance company paid her 100%.