In this case, it is clear that there is a lot of harm done by the truck. It is unfortunate that the truck just engages the transmission by itself and thereby ends up injuring a bystander. Just because the truck just engaged the transmission by itself does not mean that the owner is not liable for the damages.
According to the tort of negligence, the owner is liable of the offense as he would have taken better care of the truck and avoid it causing these damages. Therefore, Lou may sue Jana and recover for the injuries that he has suffered. However, it is necessary to classify this type of tort under the unintentional harm to a person, as Jana did not intend to harm Lou. It was an accident, which they would not have predicted. (Deakin, S., et al, 2003)
In this second case, it is clear that the company notices there is a problem with the power. However, the company has no local electrician and therefore they contact the electrician who is supposed to check on the damage. The electrician comes and repairs the damage but out of negligence fails to check whether the problem was solved and afterwards one
Need essay sample on "Business Law"? We will write a custom essay sample specifically for you for only $ 13.90/page
In this case, if the wife of the injured worker sues the company, the company my defend themselves saying that they hired an experienced electrician who claimed to have repaired the problem. They therefore were not aware that the problem was not solved completely until the accident happened. They can therefore shift all the blame to the electrician who had neglected testing for short circuit. However, they must assist the family to recover their damages from the electrician, as they were the ones who called him. (Deakin, S., et al, 2003)
Deakin, S., et al. (2003). Markesinis & Deakin’s Tort Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.