Question

Part I. Risks and Liabilities

A. Analyze and discuss two (2) areas of business law that present the greatest potential risks and liabilities for the GC business, from among these areas:

• Negligence related to any business operations
• Negligence related specifically to premises liability
• Strict product liability related to the use of EPI products for GC services
• Strict product liability related specifically to the resale of EPI products
• Contracts with employees
• Contracts for the sale of goods with clients
• Agency law and contracts with any GC agents

For EACH of the two (2) areas of the law selected from the above list, you must:

(1). Provide a background explanation of the area of law, e.g., negligence, contracts for the sale of goods, etc. (be detailed and specific so any reader can understand the meaning of the specific area of law)

(2). Analyze and explain the specific potential risks and liabilities presented by the area of law and why and how each area of law creates vulnerability for GC

(3). Provide a specific example of why and how the potential risks and liabilities could arise for each area of law for the GC business

Minimum of 3 paragraphs for EACH of the two areas of risks and liabilities you choose to discuss (total of 6 paragraphs, minimum)

Answer 1

Negligence related to any business operation:

Note that the meaning of negligence is intentionally expansive. Negligence is tied in with breaking the obligation we owe others, as controlled by state misdeed law. This obligation is regularly more extensive than the obligations forced by law. Colgan Air, for instance, may have been completely consistent with pertinent laws passed by Congress while as yet being careless. As it were, the law of negligence is a declaration of vote based system at the network and neighborhood level, in light of the fact that at last, resident juries (instead of governing bodies) choose what direct prompts risk.

To demonstrate negligence, offended parties need to show four components are available. To start with, they need to set up that the respondent owed an obligation to the offended party. Second, the offended party needs to show that the respondent penetrated that obligation. Third, the offended party needs to demonstrate that the litigant's lead caused the injury. At long last, the offended party needs to show lawfully unmistakable wounds. We'll address every one of these components thus.

In a business environment, negligence to any of the business operation may lead to the damage in the form of accidents or hazards to the employees. Negligence in the business attracts the US tort law for negligence in the business.

For example, if an employee is hired in the organisation for production department and if the organisation does not provide the necessary training to the employee for using the machines and if employee, while operating the machine, gets harmed due to accident, then non provision of training will be treated as negligence on the part of employer.

Contract with employees:

In the present evolving workforce, the utilization of contract employees, otherwise called self employed entities, specialists or work-for-enlist staff members, is getting progressively pervasive. Organizations regularly enlist these sorts of employees instead of low maintenance or full-time staff for an assortment of reasons, including budgetary concerns and the requirement for particular aptitudes.

While selecting and hiring the employees, it is the responsibility of employer to make an agreement or contract between the organisation and employee and should include the necessary considerations for the terms of the employment. The law that governs the contract with employees is the Fair Labour Standards Act (FLSA). This law prescribes standards for wages and overtime pay.

For example, if an employee is hired by the employer and after hiring if the employer does not asks the employee to sign the contract, then employee may fraudulently sue the employer on the grounds of overtime pay or the wages and under such situation employer may be in the loss as he might be required to compensate the employee.

Please Please up vote this answer. Your up vote is so valuable to me. Thank you so much.