case of KLM burger’s recent incidence along with the critical analysis through the lens of law
Answer Number One (Memo)
The objective to write this memorandum is present a case of KLM burger’s recent incidence along with the critical analysis through the lens of law. The trial begins with the customer’s order which took the lives of two people. A customer availed the drive-through services, and unfortunately, there was an accident occurred which caused deaths of parents of three children and the serviceman also suffered severe injuries. This unfortunate incident becomes more critical when it was declared that the deceased persons are not insured; however, Mordor was protected. Therefore, there is no concrete reason observed in this regard. However, the manager suspects Mordor for this incident. Then, the EVP EVP/General Counsel approached manager operations about the demand letter, which clearly stated that Mordor is partially responsible for the event. The Lawyer representing deceased passengers’ children case and claimed that KLM burger is accountable for their parents’ death, and they asked for the penalty/ compensation of CAD 15,000,000.00. It has been seen that a large number of riders meeting with accidents throughout the year and the number is increasing every year. The critical analysis highlighted the fact that if the rider is working at the time of the accident, he/she is responsible for the incident, so the company is liable to pay the compensation amount.
Answer Number Two
Since the above-mentioned case described that to some extent, the negligence of the rider took the lives of two passengers, who are the guardians and three under-aged children. The lawsuit addresses the fact that the children have suffered from a financial crisis due to their parents the non-insured lives. However, the primary reason for the accident is still unknown, and the investigation should be conducted to find the real cause or the culprit of the incidence. The ground reality is law is free from emotions as the children are naïve. In dire need of financial assistance, the final verdict will be taken after considering both parties stance in terms of facts and figures. The initial findings as per the case proceeding indicted that it was happened due to the less vigilance of the driver. However, the credibility of the minivan is still in under the investigation process. Being a legal consultant, I have presumed that minor children are deserving to get the money as they do not have any resources except the compensation money. On the other hand, the company also has a strong stance as most of the incidents happen due to the misconduct of traffic rules and regulations of both parties.
Answer Number Three
As per legal perspective, the EVP should consider both conscious of the incident. The verdict will be based on facts and figures of the event, which begins from the identification of the real culprit. Then, the decision will be made based on pieces of evidence and eye-witnesses statements, which includes the children of the deceased people. However, in most cases, laws are relatively flexible for minor people in terms of paying compensation money to them. Thus, if the culprit will be the parents or the driver of that minivan, the government compensate the children through other means. However, there is a clause which is called “vicarious liability”, which shows that the company/firm/organization is liable under this legal concept. The concept of vicarious liability describes that the organization is accountable for the incidences, happened due to the carelessness of their employees at the time incident. Hence, the chances of giving compensation by the company are more positive, which is evident in many previous lawsuits.