115.211 Business Law Assessment 3 Question 2026 | Massey University

115.211 Business Law Assessment 3

Problem Scenario

This scenario involves a dispute between a serviced apartment owner ‘Athena’ and a serviceprovider as included in the apartment ‘Titan Security LTD’. In this scenario, staff hired by Titan Security have negligently caused damage to the extent of $75 000 on the apartment owner’s vehicle. The two employees ‘Persephone and Demeter’ caused the damage whilst under the influence of alcohol and whilst not having permission to drive the vehicle.

Athena wishes to sue Titan Security for negligence, however Triton have denied liability as they do not hold a contract with Athena, but with the apartment building developers.This report will advise action for Athena, using supporting authority, to determine which grounds she could sue Titan and if she is likely to succeed.

Discussion

The main concept which can be explored to determine which grounds Athena stands on is tort law. The concept of tort law is to amends a wrong done to a person and provide compensation from the wrongful act of another usually through monetary compensation.Although tort law can be split into 3 categories, I will discuss negligent torts and liability torts in relation to this case to provide advice.

Liability Torts

Athena has experienced goods damage by employees of Titan Security, the actions of the employees have interfered with the legal right possessed by Athena. Athena has the legal right to park her vehicle in a safe and secure car park, the role of security guards is to provide a service in which the owner’s vehicles are under surveillance to mitigate and identify risk of damage or theft.

The security guards are authorised to enter and operate the vehicles under their surveillance only in the event of fire, however this was not the circumstance and therefore the employees wrongful act includes both theft (through entering and operating vehicle without permission) and damage as a result.Titan Security LTD is the employer of Persephone and Demeter, in which they pay them in order to provide a service of protection of the vehicles in the designated area.Titan Security LTD provides a service to the apartment building, this service is provided to Athena by the Apartment building as part of her ‘serviced apartment’.

The wrong-doing undertaken by Persephone and Demeter, meant that they did not carry out the action of protecting the vehicles under their surveillance. This is the action they are paid to do, and through neglecting to do this on behalf of Titan Security, has meant that Titan Security as a company has failed to provide the service they are contracted to do.

As the company has failed to provide a service it is contracted to do, it can be concluded that Titan Security LTD would be liable for the actions carried out by their employees’ Persephone and Demeter.
Tort of negligence.

In order to found an action for negligence it is necessary to established 3 elements

1. The defendant owed the plaintiff a duty of care

Duty of care owed by Titan Security to all serviced apartment owners including Athena, employees Persephone and Demeter knew that their role was to provide security and safety for vehicles on behalf of Titan Security, and as they did not do this, Titan Security was not able to deliver the service they were contracted for. Employees Persephone and Demeter also owe the company Titan Security duty of care for quality workmanship that meets the job description outlined in their contracts.

2. There was a breach of that duty of care.

Persephone and Demeter did not provide the service they were employed to undertake and as a result of this Titan Security also did not fulfil their contract to the apartment building. Persephone and Demeter did not undertake thought that operating the vehicle could result in injury to the plaintiff, hence a breach of duty of care.

3. That the plaintiff suffered a loss caused by the breach of duty and the loss thus suffered is not too remote from the tortious act of the defendant

The plaintiff has suffered lost to the extent of $75 000, this loss suffered is caused as a direct result of a breach of duty of care.
The plaintiff (Athena) is able to provide evidence for all 3 elements.
The plaintiff is able to show that the negligent act was the cause of the loss suffered.
The accident was the cause of Titan Security Employees, if Titan Security employees were correctly following their work duties the accident would not have happened.

Conclusion

In the present case, the requirements laid down in the Cox v. Ministry of Justice case are met.

Titan Security Itd., carries on activities in furtherance of its aims.

The aims are commercially motivated, so there is bar to the imposition of vicarious liability.

Security guards who work in facilities where a security service is provided by Titan Security, are integrated into the operation of the company. This is due to the acts assigned to employees provide an integral role in the service the company provides.

These employees are situated in facilities contracted to Titan Security, they are in a position where they are expected to undertake quality workmanship, however as the two employees were not under the supervision of a supervisor or senior employee, there is risk of negligent acts being committed is possible – especially in the case where there is a certain level of employee dissatisfaction as in this case.

Athena’s vehicle was damaged as a result of negligence by Persephone and Demeter, who were carrying out tasks assigned to them by Titan Security at the time of incident.

Therefore, Titan Security is therefore liable to Athena and their claim of denied liability will be dismissed by the court and Athena’s lawsuit investigation will be continued.

Going forward from here, Athena has grounds to sue Titan Security in negligence in duty of care and liability.

There is a high chance Athena will be successful in her attempt to sue Titan Security for damages to her vehicle due to the large volume of prosecutable evidence.

115.211 Business Law Assessment Questions

Question 1 Torts-Negligence

A successful claim in Negligence requires the plaintiff to show the defendant “breached their duty of care and that the plaintiff’s loss was “caused” by the breach.
Explain, with reference to case law, what a breach of a duty of care is and what it means for such a breach to cause a plaintiff’s loss.

(20 marks)

Question 2 Vitiating Factors in Contract

Mary is 16. Her mother won $1000 in a fishing competition a week ago and gave the money to Mary who spent it all on a new coat. Mary now regrets her purchase and wants to know if she can return the coat and get her money back
Identify the relevant law that applies to Mary’s situation. Does that law allow Mary to return the coat and get her money back?

(20 marks)

Question 3 Consumer Law

Mike has opened a new general store and is writing and designing his own advertisements. He has a large supply of a different vitamins he wants to sell and thinks he might advertise one of them as prevention against getting flu, another as a remedy to make man’s hair grow and the third one he thinks he will advertise as sure to increase women’s performance in sport. Mika got his ideas about what these vitamins were good for from his mother who has been selling them in her larger store for a while.

Mike also ordered some TVs to sell. They were new to the New Zealand market and Mike wants to advertise them as “soon to be the most popular TV in New Zealand”
Advise Mike, with reference to the relevant sections and cases as to whether any of his advertising ideas could, if used, amount to a breach of the Fair Trading Act 1986.

(20 marks)

Question 4 Contract Formation

Susan, who is 18, saw a nice scarf advertised in her local newspaper at a very low price. Feeling very pleased with herself for spotting the advertisement, she went to the store that was selling the scarf as soon as she finished school the next day. Susan was very upset to find, when she reached the store, that the scarf was no longer being sold at the special low price. She demanded to see the manager. The manager explained that the scarf had been very popular at the special low price and, having sold a lot of the scarfs at that low price the store had now reinstated, that morning, the old price. Susan said: “You can’t do that, I demand that you sell me that scarf at the special price!” Susan argued with the manager for a while and then went home, determined to find out what the law said about all this.

Identify the legal issue in this situation. What is the law that applies here? How does that law apply in this situation? Based on your understanding of the law, state whether you think Susan can demand to buy the scarf at the special low price advertised in the local newspaper.

NB: do not refer to the Fair Trading Act 1986 in your answer.

(10 marks)

Question 5 Te Arawhiti (Te Kāhui Whakatau) (Treaty Settlements)

Select one:

a. Is required to settle claims strictly in accordance with the directions of the Waitangi Tribunal or the Māori Land Court.
b. May agree to commence settlement negotiations even though no claim has been lodged with the Waitangi Tribunal.
C. Must settle all historical claims in accordance with instructions provided by the Waitangi Tribunal.

Question 6 Since the Treaty of Waitangi is an international treaty.

Select one:

a. The Treaty is only referred to when the courts interpret Acts which deal with Māori Land
b. Parliament has to incorporate it into our law before it is binding in New Zealand. Parliament has done this only indirectly-mostly by referring, in various Acts, to the “Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi
c. The Treaty of Waitangi is no longer referred to anywhere in our law because New Zealand is no longer a British colony

Question 7

Under $7 of the Resource Management Act, in achieving the purpose of the Act all persons exercising functions under the Act shall have particular regard to (a) kaitiakitanga. The interpretation section of the Act states that kaitiakitanga means:

Select one:

a. Māori rights with respect to fishing, water and other natural resources within the traditional rohe of the iwi concerned. Ob. Traditional Māori knowledge.
C. The exercise of guardianship by the tangata whenua of an area in accordance with tikanga Māori in relation to natural and physical resources.

Question 8 What does the Treaty contain?

Select one:

a. a preamble and three articles
b. preamble and two articles
c. preamble and four articles

Question 9 Which is correct?

Select one:

a. It is important to note that the Tribunal findings are, in general, not binding on the Crown, i.e., the government of the day. The Crown may simply refuse to consider any redress or other settlement of the claim.
b. It is important to note that the Tribunal findings are binding on the Crown, i.e., the government of the day. The Tribunal may direct the actions which the Crown must take to provide redress for any claim which the Tribunal has upheld.
c. It is important to note that the Tribunal’s findings are binding on everyone in New Zealand so that it can direct that land in private hands as well as in Crown ownership be transferred to the successful claimants.

Question 10 The Haka Ka Mate Attribution Act 2014 provides that:

Select one:

O a Te Rauparaha must be clearly and reasonably identified as both the composer of the Haka Ka Mate and a chief of Ngāti Toa Rangatira
whenever the Haka Ka Mate is published commercially or communicated to the public
O b. Ngāti Toa must authorise any use of the Haka Ka Mate, whether for a commercial or non-commercial purpose
O c. Ngāti Toa may charge a reasonable fee for any commercial use of the Haka Ka Mate

Question 11

It is generally accepted that the word “kāwanatanga” was not a good translation into te reo Māori of the term “sovereignty”. The word that would have conveyed the idea more accurately would have been “mana” but that was not used most likely because:

Select one:

a. The Williamses who provided the translation were sufficiently fluent in te reo to know that no rangatiratanga would agree to cede his or
her mana.
Ob. Kāwanatanga was already known to Māori through translation of the Bible into te reo.
OC. The Williamses, father and son, who provided the translation were not sufficiently fluent in te reo.

Question 12 Which of the following best describes the significance of the Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975?

Select one:

a The Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975 marks a new approach to the Treaty by the Crown and the institution of a tribunal to hear claims from Māori about breaches of the Treaty.
b. The Act acknowledged that most of the historical claims regarding breaches of the Treaty had already been settled.
c. The Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975 established the Waitangi Tribunal as a court to which Māori may appeal decisions of the Māori Land Court.

Hire a Professional Essay & Assignment Writer for completing your Academic Assessments

Flexible Rates Compatible With Everyone’s Budget

Order Now