Faculty of Businnes, Environment and Society Assignment

Faculty of Businnes, Environment and Society - Assignment Example This issue can lead to serious monetary and non-monetary repercussions for the company. In the legal sense, the company has displayed an unacceptable level of negligence and casualty in the management of standard of care which should have been exercised adequately by the company to ensure that it maintained its reputation as a socially responsible enterprise. As such, it is the legal duty of Choc Deluxe now to take care of the situation so that the derogatory impacts of the incidence can be lessened if not mitigated completely. It cannot be denied that sheer negligence has been done on the part of Choc Deluxe which has resulted in the monetary and physical harm for the consumer of the product, Lauren. Thus, both the aspects of financial and physical losses and harm are associated with this incidence. Not only ahs her tooth and lips dammed because of biting the nail present in the chocolates but also she has to incur a high cost of 20000 for treating her broken tooth and the cut in he r lips. This is a form of pecuniary damage done to the plaintiff as per the tort of negligence (Buxton, 2000). This is because the plaintiff has been physically injured due to the negligent conduct of the company. Due to this, Choc Deluxe has to pay the monetary expenditures incurred in the treatment of the physical injuries and damages of the plaintiff, Lauren. In addition to this, Choc Deluxe should also issue a formal apology made to the plaintiff as a way of compensating for their negligence in non-monetary terms (Conaghan and Mansell, 2008). In this case, the liability of Choc Deluxe under the Tort of Negligence is high as there has been a significant lack of responsible behavior and exercising of the standard of care in the manufacturing processes and products of the company (Williams and Hepple, 2008). The incidence also brings into light the loopholes in the quality check

Supreme Court Trilogy Decisions in 1960 Case Study

Supreme Court Trilogy Decisions in 1960 - Case Study Example The Steelworkers' Trilogy has significantly changed the way Arbitration is dealt with in America. The principles of law lifted from these cases served as the guidance and the primary basis in almost all of the decisions of the U.S. courts in arbitration cases that came into their attention for the succeeding years. This study will present the principles of law in relation to arbitration that were lifted from these cases. Specifically, this study aims to know, discuss, and analyze 1) the nature of the collective bargaining agreement, 2) the grievances that must be subjected to arbitration, 3) the scope of authority and powers of the arbitrators, and 4) the role of the courts in arbitration cases. 1) The basis for determining who has the authority for grievance proceedings is the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) which is the contract entered into between the management and a recognized bargaining union of a company. 2) Arbitration is a contractual issue. As such, the courts should not intervene if both parties voluntarily agreed under the CBA to authorize an arbitrator to resolve disputes arising from different interpretations of the negotiated agreement. 3) Courts cannot look into the merits of the arbitration award. The courts' judicial review is only limited to the question of whether the contract authorizes arbitration of the particular issue in dispute. The resea4) If the agreement does not explicitly authorize arbitration or does not provide the forum for grievances, the courts should determine it. Methodology and Scope The researcher carefully read and thoroughly analyzed the decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court in these cases. He also researched and examined the opinions and findings of legal personalities and writers after these cases were decided. Aside from the trilogy cases, the researcher also made use of one additional case and six commentaries and/or researches, all were taken from reputable sources in the Internet. Review of Related Literature Rainseberger enumerated the common law treatment of voluntary remedies: "Traditionally, in the United States, the courts have looked with disfavor at efforts of private citizens to use voluntary methods to resolve contractual disputes. Many states courts have seen arbitration of disputes as an undesirable alternative to litigation. It is often viewed as an effort to supplant to jurisdiction of the courts. Under the common law, arbitrating agreements were regarded as purely executory. In other words, an agreement to arbitrate a dispute could unilaterally revoke at any time prior to the issuance of a final award." Gershenfeld stated that: "From the 1930s to the 1950s, it was not uncommon for management to argue that an arbitrator's task in disciplinary matters was limited to determining whether or not the incident of which the employee was accused had occurred. If it had, management claimed the arbitrator's task was over, and the assigned penalty should be upheld. This view did not prevail in the following years." In the case of Raceway Park v. Local 47 Service Employees International, the U.S. Court of Appeals (for Six Circuit), citing the International Association of Machinists v. Cuttler-Hammer (67 N.Y. S.2d 317), said: " Prior to 1960, states courts hesitated to enforce grievance arbitration provisions. Even where state courts were willing to enforce CBAs, they often did so