Order ID:89JHGSJE83839 | Style:APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago | Pages:5-10 |
Instructions:
General Tort Law of Negligence in New Zealand
I’m working on a business law question and need guidance to help me learn.
Bart while driving his new sports car through a small town, lost control of the vehicle while seeking to adjust the volume on his I phone and the car left the road and crashed through the front wall of Pat and Chris’s house. Not surprisingly, the house is badly damaged and the costs of repair are some $100,000. In addition, until it has been fully reinstated, the council declared that it was uninhabitable and Pat and Chris had to reside in a motel at $700 per week for some 10 weeks. Because the wall that Bart crashed through was that of the lounge a $5000 television together with a $4,000 home theatre system were written off as well as furniture and floor coverings to the value of $5,000. Pat and Chris also owned an original painting by L S Lowry a well-known English artist. The painting had recently been left to Pat by an uncle in the UK and they had asked a local art expert to value it. Bart’s inadvertent incursion into their lounge unfortunately destroyed the picture which was not covered by their content’s insurance. Pat and Chris subsequently received the expert’s valuation which valued the painting at $120,000.
Required: Outline with reasons, the extent to which Bart or his insurers would bel liable to compensate Pat and Chris for the above losses.
RUBRIC |
||||||
Excellent Quality 95-100%
|
Introduction
45-41 points The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned. |
Literature Support 91-84 points The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned. |
Methodology 58-53 points Content is well-organized with headings for each slide and bulleted lists to group related material as needed. Use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. to enhance readability and presentation content is excellent. Length requirements of 10 slides/pages or less is met. |
|||
Average Score 50-85% |
40-38 points More depth/detail for the background and significance is needed, or the research detail is not clear. No search history information is provided. |
83-76 points Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is little integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are included. Summary of information presented is included. Conclusion may not contain a biblical integration. |
52-49 points Content is somewhat organized, but no structure is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. is occasionally detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met. |
|||
Poor Quality 0-45% |
37-1 points The background and/or significance are missing. No search history information is provided. |
75-1 points Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is no integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are not included in the summary of information presented. Conclusion does not contain a biblical integration. |
48-1 points There is no clear or logical organizational structure. No logical sequence is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects etc. is often detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met |
|||
You Can Also Place the Order at www.collegepaper.us/orders/ordernow or www.crucialessay.com/orders/ordernow
General Tort Law of Negligence in New Zealand |
General Tort Law of Negligence in New Zealand