College Business Law Case Study Question- need a point in the right direction!?

[caelin]

So, I just began my first Business law class (not aspiring to be a lawyer, btw, it's just part of my course) and I am given two case study questions. I'm completely baffled by law and I have no idea what kind of answer by teach is looking for.... if someone could just give me a hint I know I could elaborate and expand. They seem really vague and open ended, haha

First case: A train derails in B.C. which results in some harmful chemicals being dumped into a small stream, causing significant eviromental damage. What juristictional issues are raised in the scenario?

Second one, Simone is against genetically modifies foods and he believes they are extremely dangerous to consumers. What legal paths can he take in fighting for his belief? Which would be most efficiant?

Please give me a little push!

[cleirach70]

It would help to have more context, like how these questions relate to the reading you have been assigned, but I can try to help a bit.

For the first one, think about who might be in charge, or claim to be in charge. Is this a federal issue? Province? Some smaller unit of government? Does it matter whether the train was working for a local company, or is it irrelevant? Think about all the groups that might either claim to be in charge or try to shirk their responsibility.

The second one is a bit harder, at least for me. I can't think of any legal recourse this person could have other than lobbying politicians to change the laws. He doesn't have standing to sue because he hasn't been harmed, and even if he felt he had been harmed, he only has "beliefs" rather than the proof he would need to win in court.

Hope this helps!

[jen]

Railways:

Railways come under federal jurisdiction, but the federal enterprise is subject to provincial laws regarding things such as spills. The reasoning lies in the division of powers as set out in the constitution -- MUCH too detailed to discuss here. Look at Prof. Hogg's constitutional law text for a good explanation. You may also have contractual clauses that require a party to proceed in a particular province and/or court.

Here is a link to a Sask case that is very close to your scenario. It's Brooks v CPR and is from 2007.

http://www.canlii.org/en/sk/skqb/doc/2007/2007skqb247/2007skqb247.html


Here's a link to a case that gives an example of contractual provisions influencing jurisdiction:
http://www.canlii.org/en/ns/nssc/doc/2007/2007nssc280/2007nssc280.html

Have fun.


Foods:
Obviously, this is a political issue, but there may be some legal options, as well. One idea would be to find a person who can prove they were harmed by modified food. Armed with expert opinions supporting the claim, this person would be able to commence a claim against those involved in modifying the food, providing the food to consumers, and possibly against the government for permitting these activities. The claim against the government would be VERY hard to prove, since governments have defences not available to other defendants. At any rate, if you can find a person to sue and it seems that many people would have similar claims, you could try to have that person's claim certified as a class action.