Asked by Jordan Jeyachandran on Jul 17, 2024

Verified

Celebrating the end of the fall term, Mr. C had already drunk six beers before he arrived with his friends at the Spoke Tavern, run by the student council. After he had two more beers, he was refused more and told he would be asked to leave if he did have more. He returned to the table and continued to drink. He was ordered to leave. While being escorted out, he resisted but was ejected. He snuck back in, "spoiling for a fight," and was removed once more. He returned, and when pushed through the doorway, he stumbled. His hand went through a small window, and he had to undergo surgery to repair a tendon in his wrist. Mr. C sued the tavern, the bouncer, and the student council (as operators of the tavern) under the Occupiers' Liability Act. Read each of the following separately and indicate which is false.

A) The Occupiers' Liability Act in this province provides that an occupier of land owes a duty to take reasonable steps to make sure that any person will be reasonably safe.
B) If the court holds that Mr. C voluntarily took the risk, Mr. C will get no award of damages from the defendants.
C) To successfully use the defence of volenti no fit injuria (he volunteered to take the risk) , the court must find that the plaintiff knew the risk, volunteered to take the risk, and expressly or impliedly waived his right of action.
D) If the court holds that Mr. C was contributorily negligent, Mr. C could get no compensation from the defendants.
E) Under our Occupiers' Liability Act, a tenant could be liable, not just the land owner.