Law Assignment: Violation Of Law Prohibited In Australia By Jane And Jia



Jane and Jia are two influential bloggers who are passionate about makeup. They saw an opportunity to make some money by selling beauty products. They decided to create their own line of lipstick – Rouge - and take full advantage of the online world to market Rouge on social media. Jane and Jia used their own monies and a loan Jane obtained from her friend, Mahit, to place an order for a small batch of lipstick with a famous cosmetics manufacturer ‘Neon Lipstick’. Mahit had no interest in makeup, but he was happy to help his friend, Jane, with her start-up business. Jane and Jia planned to recoup the monies they spent from the profits and then pay the balance to Mahit.

Clarissa, one of the customers who purchased Rouge, has developed an allergy. Her lips became severely swollen as a result of using the lipstick sold by Jane and Jia’s business. Clarissa visited her dermatologist on the same day, and the dermatologist advised her, upon inspecting the label of the lipstick, that one of the ingredients was a prohibited chemical in Australia and no other makeup brand uses it. 2) Discuss who of the business partners are liable for the damages suffered by Clarissa? Please make sure that you only assess the legal risks under tort of negligence. Also support your answer by citing relevant cases.

Only from Law in commerce 5th and 6th edition book will work and Partnership Act 1958 victoria


What matters in this case is whether any of the partners are responsible for the losses Clarissa has incurred.

Rule: If there was a duty of care due by one of the parties and there was a breach of the duty of care, it is the most crucial issue to take into account in a negligence case. Because it is presumed by law that a party has a duty of care towards another party and he shall not act in any manner that can cause any loss or damage, the duty of care concept is one of the most crucial factors to be taken into consideration in the event of negligence (Ben-Shahar and Porat 2016). The responsibility of care must be viewed from the viewpoint of a reasonable person when taking action. It is crucial to realise that a person must act like a reasonable man and will be held accountable if any of his actions cause loss or harm to the party who is being wronged. The good faith concept, which stipulates that a person shall be held accountable if they do not keep in mind the best interest of the parties for engaging in intimate Association, is also the foundation of negligence law.

The civil responsibility of negligence considers the foreseeability of a reasonable man and his behaviour in a certain situation. If it is shown that his acts caused a loss or damage, he will be required to pay compensation and damages for his lack of judgement. In order to determine if there has been carelessness and whether a legal duty has been violated, it is crucial to take into account both the rule of law and the tort of negligence (Goldberg, Sebok and Zipursky 2016). A person is required by law to uphold a standard of behaviour, which is a legal duty and obligation. It is done in order to safeguard against any form of irrational and unforeseen risk that might arise as a result of his unlawful behaviour. According to the law, if it is determined that a person's actions have put others at risk or in danger, the law will impose a duty of care and accountability on him to ensure that he makes restitution.

The duty of care and subsequent breach of the duty to cause injury is the most significant rule that negligence in tort has established (Epstein amd Sharkey 2016). Donoghue v. Stevenson, a seminal decision that created the claim of negligence, stipulated that four components were to be proven in order to show that there was a duty of care and that negligence had occurred. The four crucial components are: • The defendant should have exercised reasonable care; • There was a breach of that obligation; and • The breach resulted in harm and loss.