Business law Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Business law - Assignment Example In this context, what LaMance points out is relevant. According to him, a hotel has to take a set of legal measures to avoid liability. If the hotel management fails to take adequate measures to ensure the safety of its guests, then the hotel management would be held liable for its negligent acts. First, the hotel management should be able to anticipate possible safety threats within the hotel environment. If the hotel is really aware of the degree of intensity of criminal acts, it can take adequate safety measures to address those issues. As LakMance proposes, the hotel management can install surveillance cameras or hire more security guards to ensure the safety of guests and their valuables. In addition to anticipating risk factors, the hotel should communicate proper warning to guests to make them aware of the safety threats identified. Finally, hotels have also the responsibility to maintain their properties properly. To illustrate, easy access windows and faulty door locks may s ometimes assist criminals to break into rooms. Hence, the hotel management has to make certain that its properties are managed properly. In the Freda case, there is a possibility to argue that the Gullies Hotel management did not take adequate measures to ensure the safety of the guest’s valuable even though the management has been aware of the theft issues within the hotel environment. However, it must be noted that the Gullies’ management had arranged special facilities at the reception for keeping the valuables of their clients. Despite theft warning and special security facilities, Freda left the hotel leaving cash and expensive jewelries in her room and this negligence resulted in the theft of her valuables. Question 2 The doctrine of precedent is one of the fundamental and oldest features of the English legal system. In addition, it is considered to be the heart of the common law system. â€Å"The doctrine of precedent states that a decision made by a court in o ne case is binding on other courts in later cases involving similar facts† (as qtd in Harris199). The most potential benefit of the doctrine of precedent is that it promotes uniformity within the law. More precisely, it meets the general conception of justice by treating similar cases in the similar manner. The basic concepts of the doctrine of precedent have been well stated and are easy to understand. According to this doctrine, as Harris points out, all courts must adhere to the previous decisions made by superior courts in similar cases. The second rule of the doctrine of precedent sates that current decisions made by courts will be applied to all future cases which have similar facts (199-200). However, law experts argue that this feature may lead to interpretation difficulties for the courts. As discussed already, adherence to precedent is helpful to maintain a system of stable laws, which in turn promotes the predictability of laws and provides individuals with a greate r degree of security. As legal advisors point out, the doctrine of precedent is essential to make certain that laws develop in accordance with changing views of the society only and hence laws clearly reflect morals and expectations of the society as well. Since the doctrine of