BUS 3305 - Written Assignment Unit 2 (1)

Written Assignment Unit 2: Litigation, ADR, and Criminal Law University of the People BUS 3305 - Business Law and Ethics Linda Howe (Instructor) Date: June 27, 2023

Written Assignment Unit 2 For each of the following scenarios, state whether you believe litigation, ADR, or criminal prosecution is the appropriate response and explain your answer, citing information from the textbook as support for your positions. Answer: Introduction: The legal part is very significant and mandatory to secure the rights of individuals and their freedom. Moreover, the legislation supports building a secure place for each person. There are three different approaches I have understood this week to impose legitimate rights. These legitimate rights are known as litigation which is a legal action filed in the court to identify the remedies and debts (Lau & Johnson, (n.d.) p.44). There is another approach known as ADR (Alternative Dispute Resolution) is a concept that comprises several different techniques of dispute resolution distinguished from litigation (Lau & Johnson, (n.d.) p.1). Hence, every approach has a particular situation that allocates with the origin of the case. There are three different scenarios that will indicate the required response, which is as below: First Scenario: Adele is a secretary for her company. As part of her responsibilities, she can write checks for the purchase of office supplies. One week, she is short on cash and may not have enough money to buy groceries for herself and her daughter. She writes a check out to herself, intending only to do this once and reimburse the account. She never does, though, and finds herself in a similar situation a few weeks later. This happens several times and Adele ends up taking a large amount of money from the account. Eventually, the accounting manager discovers a discrepancy and confronts Adele, who admits to writing checks to herself. Response: In this first scenario, the case of Adele is a criminal case which is also known as white-collar crime, and has committed a crime, thus she must face the consequences of her deed. Though she has criminal intent initially, Adele did not repay the amount of money which lead her to motivate to act criminally. This illegal behaviour is a crime, and criminal persecution must be utilized. Among staff, Adele is recognized as a trustworthy employee which is why she has the duty of managing the finance for many years without any supervision which made her easier for her to perform a criminal act. The inside jobs" are minor crimes done by trusted persons (Lau & Johnson, 2011). Adele's intention was to pay back the funds, but the matter of fact is that she could easily escape without any penalties made her self-approving regarding

the repayment. While she is working in the company, she feels secure at times committed a wrongful act (Lau & Johnson, 2011). I think the attempt at an illegal act by Adele does not justify her behaviour. Lau and Johnson declare that if the individual is sincere in acknowledging their misdeed, it does not let off her duty of being vigilant of securing herself and the organization as well. Hence, as a staff member, she is known to cancelation due payments that can counteract stolen funds, some firms choose the ADR (Alternative Dispute Resolution) with a notice of termination and the reduction of funds from her last receiving cheque from the company. Second Scenario: Robert has purchased a doll from a large, multinational company for his infant daughter. His daughter enjoys playing with the toy. However, several weeks after getting the doll, Robert's daughter pulls one of the doll ' s fingers. She puts it in her mouth and swallows it. The doll's finger blocks her airways. Robert rushes her to the hospital. Doctors are able to remove the doll's finger, but not before lack of oxygen causes brain damage to Robert's daughter, resulting in extensive medical bills and a heavily impaired quality of life for the little girl. Response: It portrays that the doll was faulty by the manufacturing company because of the way the child easily detaches a finger from the doll. The multinational company whose functions are in several nations, must act in accordance with the law relevant security of children in the nations. The Consumer Right Act interacts with the duty of manufacturers to produce products of good quality. The relatable problems arise without solutions that the product could be not appropriate for the infant child, there might be any defect on a certain part of the product, the finger might be expected to separate from the doll, the toys with small elements must have detailed data to the consumers which are suitable for children under three years old. Furthermore, as part Robert, there were some questions arise was Robert being careless in choosing a toy for his child? Before purchasing the product, did he forget to read the instructions carefully? Thus, both parties are answerable for the prosecution in a potential manner on the unfortunate circumstance. The buyer of the doll is supposed to be secure although it leads to becoming harmful for the child. Thus, the manufacturer is responsible for not making a sufficient quality product for a particular cause or utilizing, for instance, a toy. The manufacturer is accountable for making a faulty good that affected a child-girl to go through brain damage and the child's family lives to be entirely changed. I think the ideal legal procedure will be for this scenario is litigation. The brain of the child is damaged and becoming the child has additional needs and the family suffers a challenging time. In my opinion, this includes a manufacturer getting ahead above the ADR (Alternative Dispute Resolution) procedure and it is not part of a criminal act as it includes a dispute on the product defection and health damage. The procedure of filing a legitimate complaint opposite to another person for an offense or default committed against each other is recognized as litigation. This challenge is a scenario of product defection and the disputing behaviors that have required the involvement of a judge (third person) in the legitimate trial. In this situation, my viewpoint leads toward