Preview

Legal Analysis of the Article, Tourist Breaks Back on Sentosa Ride

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
2491 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Legal Analysis of the Article, Tourist Breaks Back on Sentosa Ride
Legal Analysis on “Tourist Breaks Back on Sentosa Ride” Article
Sherlyn Goh, Nathanael Sim, Tay Wenyao, Shi Jinhua, Tong Mingshuo

Factual Summary of Case Australian tourist, Michael McCarthy, suffered a fall and broke his back while riding Sentosa’s MegaZip, which is a flying fox adventure ride run by Flying Dragon Adventures (FDA). The riders would initially slide down the zipline fast and would be slowed down by a braking mechanism as they approach the landing platform. However, in this case, McCarthy was travelling towards the landing platform at a faster speed than usual. As a result, he crashed onto the platform and broke several vertebrae in his back. He felt incredible pain and could not breathe for a minute and a half. McCarthy had no immediate medical help as there was no medical staff on-site. He only received assistance half an hour later and was taken to Singapore General Hospital 1 hour 15 minutes later. He received 35 stitches to his back and spent 5 days in and out of the intensive care unit. As for the ride, McCarthy satisfied safety requirements of being at least 0.7m tall and less than 140kg in weight. This was the first accident in its two-year history of operation. Before the accident, the ride had been taken by at least 200,000 visitors in total and was already taken by 140 people on that day. Alexander Blyth, managing director of the ride, believed that all safety procedures were followed, that nothing failed and nothing snapped. The ride also requires customers to sign indemnity forms, in which contains an exemption clause that states that they are not responsible for any deaths or personal injuries unless through gross negligence. Blyth reported the case to the Building and Construction Authority (BCA), the regulatory body for amusement rides. Lawyers are attempting to seek compensation for McCarthy’s injuries, as they question the validity of the exclusion clause in the indemnity form by bringing up the Unfair Contract Terms Act (UCTA).

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    Citation- Legal Brief

    • 1352 Words
    • 4 Pages

    There was no evidence that the mechanical bull’s design caused the plaintiff’s injury. There was no substantiation that that showed that El Toro performed unsafely when used as intended with the recommended padding. The design called for a landing pad and warned all purchasers of this requirement. Nothing was shown in this case to prove that the mattresses used were not adequate to ensure reasonable and acceptable safe operations of the mechanical bull. The manufacturer of the mechanical bull had no way to foresee that it would be used without the recommended pad. The purpose of El Toro, the mechanical bull was to train rodeo performers. Gilley’s had no way to know that the mechanical bull was…

    • 1352 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    1. How could this have happened when the insurance was in force at the time of the accident?…

    • 364 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Law Assignment Bungee

    • 1178 Words
    • 5 Pages

    The primary cause of action being pursued by the plaintiff against The Victoria Falls Bungee Co. is vicarious liability as a result of the negligence of their employees. The Victoria Falls Bungee Co. employees were negligent in their actions because they owed a duty of care to ensure customer safety, which they breached, ultimately causing Ms. Langworthy's injuries.…

    • 1178 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    The case of Gansz V. Alton Haunted House originated when a girl tripped while running from an individual with a loud motor driven chainsaw at a haunted house in Alton, Illinois on October 29, 2011 (Faces of Lawsuit Abuse, 2013). The girl’s father, Terry Gansz, claims the haunted house tour included a section where patrons were directed through a passage leading to a ramp with an entry to the rear of the haunted bus. American Legion is being blamed for the design of the haunted house making it difficult for patrons to exit the attraction (Madison Record, 2013). Arguing that the plaintiff voluntarily assumed the risks of the haunted house, the defendants claim they are not at fault and should not be liable for any injuries claimed (Madison Record, 2013).…

    • 662 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    A “suit” is defined to include a “civil proceeding in which damages because of ‘bodily injury’ . . . to which this insurance applies is alleged.” At present, no suit has been filed against the insured for the losses sustained. Determining whether an insurer has a duty to defend is accomplished by comparing an insured’s policy against allegations made against the insured in a complaint. Under the Section II – Liability part of the policy, a suit is a condition precedent to the insurer’s obligation to either defend or indemnify the insured for liability…

    • 728 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Mr. Class V.: Case Study

    • 1180 Words
    • 5 Pages

    (#4-7) According to the case, the plaintiff should not be held as semi liable for his injuries while attending the Daytona International Speedway. My client should receive a decision in his favor because NASCAR and the Daytona International Speedway were and are negligent in how races are conducted, the design of the speedway, and the lack of safety barriers to protect spectators, such as my client, from being severely injured during an event. There were several issues that NASCAR and the Daytona International Speedway are responsible for that resulted in the traumatic injury my client sustained. According to my client the numerous problems that resulted in the plaintiff’s injuries are:…

    • 1180 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Case Brief

    • 340 Words
    • 2 Pages

    The claimant, Morgan, sustained severe physical injuries caused by an accident which occurred as he was driving a two person bobsled during a national championship race. Morgan was an experienced rider who had been bobsledding for over 20 years and had competed in the US Olympics. He also testified that he was familiar with this particular course and had raced on it many times prior to this race. The area where the accident occurred was recently reconstructed and substantially modified but was approved by FIBT, the regulating authority of the sport. Morgan brought a lawsuit in the Court of Claims stating that the design of the exit ramp was the cause of his accident and injuries. The defendant, State of New York, which owns and operates the mountain, stated that the athlete assumed the risks of a dangerous sport and was primarily to blame for the accident.…

    • 340 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    There is a issues in the current case which need to be solved. The issue is if Li can be held liable for the injuries suffered by Paul Henri. Paul Henri is diagnosed with a concussion by playing barrel rolling operating by Li when he was looking to get some more excitement in his life. Therefore, the question arises if it can be established that Li is liable under the law of negligence for the injuries suffered by Paul Henri. For this purpose, it need to be seen if Li had taken all reasonable steps due to which the people may be prevented from playing.…

    • 1661 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    One very important issue in this case and many civil lawsuits is negligence. Negligence is when there is a failure to use reasonable care which results in injury or damage to another. It also asks who is responsible for one’s injury. In this case, Mrs. McKoy claims her injuries were caused by T & J’s negligent behavior. In order to prove negligence, T & J must be guilty of five elements: duty of due care, breach, factual cause, proximate cause, and damages.…

    • 605 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Article Review Week 3 Law

    • 474 Words
    • 2 Pages

    They are different types of and legal protections of intellectual property. There are Copyrights, Patents, Trademarks, and Trade Secrets. Copyrights protect original works of authorship, such as literature, music, artistic works, and computer software, for example plagiarism, or use of music with in a game or music without the owner’s permission. As the holder of a copyright you have the exclusive right to reproduce, adapt and to distribute the work. Patents grant the rights on inventions, allowing the patent holder to exclude others from making, selling, or using the invention. An example would be the as seen on TV items you won’t see the item on shelves at Wal-Mart until patent runs out and other companies are allowed to make it. Trademarks are words, phrases, symbol, or designs that distinguishes the item from other competitors, such as Nike. Everyone can distinguish Nike product by just the Swoosh symbol. There is also Trade Secrets, which is a formula, process or device or any other way that keeps a company’s secret to give them an advantage. An example of a trade secret is Coca Cola. Their formula has been kept secret for decades, they have taken the necessary steps to control disclosure of the information (upcounsel.com). the law steps into place when any of these are filed with the federal government, such as the US patent office. They can provide protection from other competitors using your ideas. They can provide an attorney if needed. An e-company can benefit from any of these types of protections from the government, especially the Federal Trade Commission, depending what they offer. An example being Amazon. They fall under almost all of the different intellectual properties. Copyrights, being one of the first companies to offer online sales of anything needed except what is considered illegal. Trademarks…

    • 474 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    When assessing whether a no fault regime is better than a negligence rule in dealing with the causes and consequences of medical error, it would seem prudent to first understand the meaning of the term “medical error”. Liang defines medical error as ‘a mistake, inadvertent occurrence, or unintended event in health-care delivery which may, or may not, result in patient injury’ (2000, p.542). The consequence of these errors (or adverse events) that lead to patient injury, and the method by which we determine and administer compensation for such injuries, has been the source of heated debate amongst scholars in recent times. Fenn et al suggest that public policy has two key objectives to address in this area: ‘providing compensation to those who have suffered injuries and providing incentives to practitioners to supply an appropriate standard of care’ (2004, p.272). Fenn et al (2004) also relay the dissatisfaction with the current scheme in England, which uses the tort of negligence to award damages; describing it as costly and time consuming due to the need to prove fault, meaning too few patients receive compensation for their injuries.…

    • 3240 Words
    • 13 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Torts Notes

    • 3647 Words
    • 15 Pages

    * INTRODUCED Civil Law (Wrongs Act 2002). Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW) Personal Injury (Liabilities and damages) NT.…

    • 3647 Words
    • 15 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    12) Goody,M.(2008) Negligence: ‘Legal Frameworks of Health and Safety’ in Oakley, B. and Rhys, M.(eds) The Sport and Fitness Sector: An Introduction, London, Routledge/Milton Keynes, The Open University.…

    • 2445 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Better Essays

    Hall & Upson Co. – Smithwick was told not to work on a platform but was not told that the wall was about to collapse. He worked on platform despite the warning because he believed the risk of falling was the only danger. The court held that the failure to heed a warning is not contributory negligence if the injury was the result of a different source of risk caused by the defendant, and the injured party was unaware of that risk.”…

    • 3010 Words
    • 13 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    1. Whether the plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence and assume the risk of particular accident?…

    • 488 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays