0 valutazioniIl 0% ha trovato utile questo documento (0 voti)
350 visualizzazioni1 pagina
Soldier of Fortune magazine ran an ad that led to a man being hired to commit murder. The victim's family sued the magazine for breaching its duty of care by publishing an ad that could reasonably lead to criminal activity. The court found that Soldier of Fortune did not owe a duty to investigate ads as it would be an unreasonable burden, and the ad in question had vague and ambiguous language. Therefore, the magazine could not have breached any duty to the victim.
Soldier of Fortune magazine ran an ad that led to a man being hired to commit murder. The victim's family sued the magazine for breaching its duty of care by publishing an ad that could reasonably lead to criminal activity. The court found that Soldier of Fortune did not owe a duty to investigate ads as it would be an unreasonable burden, and the ad in question had vague and ambiguous language. Therefore, the magazine could not have breached any duty to the victim.
Soldier of Fortune magazine ran an ad that led to a man being hired to commit murder. The victim's family sued the magazine for breaching its duty of care by publishing an ad that could reasonably lead to criminal activity. The court found that Soldier of Fortune did not owe a duty to investigate ads as it would be an unreasonable burden, and the ad in question had vague and ambiguous language. Therefore, the magazine could not have breached any duty to the victim.
Facts: Soldier of Fortune ran an ad that later led to a man being hired to commit murder. The family of he victim sued the magazine saying that they breached a duty of care in publishing an ad that could reasonable lead to criminal activity. The magazine had 7 ads out of 2000 shown to lead to criminal activity at the time. Further the magazine was a mercenary and gun for hire magazine. Issue: Did soldier of fortune owe a duty to investigate ads that may lead to criminal activity Holding: No they did not Reasoning: the court held that It would be an unreasonable burden for Solider of Fortune to investigate every ad that was placed in it. The advertisement in question had language which the court said to be at the most vague and ambiguous. The court further said that therefore soldier of fortune had no duty towards the victim to investigate and thus could not breach any duty.