SCENARIO-1 a) What is the relevant tort in this scenario? ANSWER- Tort of Defamation has been committed here because in this situation, Simon, a safety officer at Bic's, a very good quality retail chain, confused a client's remarks with a woman or a shoplifter. He didn't examine the box she was holding or carrying to see what she was holding. Out of doubt or because of mere suspicion, he reached the police and accompanied her to the back room, where he advised her to delay until the police showed up. Simon's doubts that the woman was a shoplifter has led here lowering image down in others person’s eye. b) Has a tort been committed? Explain why or why not. (List the elements of the relevant tort and explain why those elements are or are not satisfied) (3 marks) ANSWER- Yes Tort has been committed here because Simon detained Yoko because he suspected her of shoplifting. He never bothered to ask Yoko about the contents of the package. He brought her to a back room and contacted the police based only on a customer's statement. By failing to inspect Yoko's possessions and summoning the police needlessly, he committed a tort. Because Simon did not fulfil his duties correctly and alerted the police of a false suspicion, the case's ingredients are applicable tort. On suspicion, he also forced Yoko to wait in a backroom, which is not acceptable and qualifies for the tort. These conditions must be met for a tort to be committed. ELEMENTS OF DEFAMATION TORT: A. STATEMENT WAS MADE ABOUT YOKO. B. THE STATEMENT TENDS TO BE DEFAMATORY AND UNCOMPLIMANTRY IN NATURE. C. STATEMENT HAS LOWERED YOKO’S IMAGE IN MIND OF PEOPLE SURROUNDED HER. D. STATEMENT HAS BEEN ADDRESSED BY SIMON TO ATLEAST MORE THAN ONE PEOPLE. SCENARIO-2 a) What is the relevant tort in this scenario? The relevant tort over here is damage to Property i.e Interference with contractual Relations. b) Has a tort been committed? Explain why or why not. (List the elements of the relevant tort and explain why those elements are or are not satisfied) (3 marks) ANSWER- The tort has been committed hereThe Elements that led to this tort are explained hereunder There exists a valid contract between plaintiff i.e Gwen and Stacy Contractor. Defendant that is Stacey Contractor was aware about the said contractual relation. Defendant act was unjustified which lead to a breach of contract. The damage was cause because of the wrongful conduct on part of the defendant. Hence, Plaintiff has right to claim damage in that regard. SCENARIO-3 A. What is the relevant tort in this scenario? The relevant tort over here in this scenario is the Tort of Nuisance. b. Has a tort been committed? Explain why or why not. (List the elements of the relevant tort and explain why those elements are or are not satisfied) (3 marks) Yes, Tort has been committed here. As Tort of Nuisance addresses the conflicts between the neighbours stemming from the land that is used. The same has been seen in this scenario where the nuisance has been done to Lawrence land by his neighbours. Throwing of garbage in Lawrence deck amounts to unreasonable and substantial interference with the use and enjoyment of land by his neighbour. The said interference is hampering the Lawrence right of right to enjoy his property. Hence, the said elements are fulfilling the criteria of judging the tort of nuisance.