In business law, numerous laws have been developed to safeguard the rights of businesses as well as the rights of individuals and groups. One of the most common laws in business law is the law of tort. This law seeks to safeguard peoples’ civil rights by preventing damages to property and body injuries. Another law that has been widely applied, especially in the housing business, is the property law. This law gives property owners their rightful occupation of land and buildings and prevents intrusions from other people. Criminal law seeks to protect people and businesses from criminal acts leading to fear, harm, or damage to personal welfare. All these laws have been applied in determining the intrusion case that caused damage to property and injuries to both Sharon and Darryl.

You're lucky! Use promo "samples20"
and get a custom paper on
"Business Torts And Ethics Paper"
with 20% discount!
Order Now

Business Torts And Ethics

In business law, businesses have rights, obligations, and responsibilities. This basically means that businesses can sue or be sued in a court of law for their activities or activities carried out by their agents. Employees, tenants, and third parties also have their rights in business law and this is the point of integration between business torts and ethics. Violation of the rights of employees or third parties will be a violation of the business’s ethical code of conduct.

Is the Intruder Liable for what he has Done?
In the given case of Sharon and Your Own University Heights Apartments, the intruder is liable for intruding into private property, causing damage the room, and injuring both Sharon and Darryl. Property law gives property owners the right to guard and manage their property as they wish. The law identifies land, and properties on the land, as personal and distinct property (Wilkof, 2013). The law also prohibits intrusion into private property. By breaking into Sharon’s house, the intruder is liable for violating the property law and can thus be sued in a court of law.

The law of tort is explained as a civil wrong that leads to an injury or loss in another person. When a tort is committed, the person who commits the act, the tortfeasor, will have a legal liability and can thus be sued in a court of law (Kritzer, 2007). The intruder has broken into Sharon’s house, thus causing damage. As a result, he can be sued for property damage. In addition, the intruder has caused a civil wrong by injuring both Sharon and Darryl. He should thus be sued in a court of law for injuries and damages caused.

Legal Responsibilities to Sharon and Darryl
Both Sharon and Darryl have a legal responsibility of reporting the case to the legal authority. In criminal law, an act will be considered a crime if it is deemed as harmful, threatening, or endangering the welfare and safety of other people (Sarch, 2015). In this case, the welfare and safety of the victims have greatly threatened following the intrusion and this means that the intruder committed a criminal act. The legal system in the US requires victims of criminal cases to report to the authorities, even if they feel that the impact was not that big.

The other responsibility on the side of Sharon and Darryl is that they ought to have used reasonable force in response to the intrusion. The fact that they both sustained injuries means that probably the intruder had a sharp object that he used to attack them. In the case, both Sharon and Darryl seem to have used reasonable force because they did not kill or seriously injure the intruder. If for example, Sharon had a gun and shot the victim, a case may be raised against her that he did not use reasonable force and the judge may rule against her.

Ethical Responsibilities to Sharon and Darryl
Ethics refers to the moral rules that govern peoples’ activities and behaviors. In the given case, a civil wrong has been done to both Sharon and Darryl. This means that they have to report the case to a legal administration body so that an action can be taken. When reporting the case of a legal administrative body, both Sharon and Darryl have an ethical responsibility not to represent matters of facts (Vazquez, 2016). In other words, both victims must tell the truth in regard to how the situations turned around. The truth will help the administrative body in getting to the bottom of the matter and providing justice as provided by the law. If the victims however tell lies when reporting the case to the police of the legal body, they will have violated their ethical responsibility.

Both Sharon and Darryl have an ethical responsibility to avoid conflict of interest. Both Sharon and Darryl are operating in the same organization and this means that may develop conflict of interest when reporting the damage caused by the intruder, mainly with the aim of obtaining a higher compensation. This ethical responsibility is closely related to the statement of material fact representation (Vazquez, 2016). If the victims cannot avoid conflict of interest, then they will have violated their ethical responsibility.

Although both Sharon and Darryl are supposed to help in conducting the investigation, they have the responsibility to allow the administrative body to carry out the investigation and bring the victim. This basically means that they have the responsibility not to interfere with the case during the interrogation of the victim (Vazquez, 2016). The case in consideration is a criminal case and this means that only the criminal court can decide the fate of the intruder. The victims should not interfere, even if they want to show mercy to the intruder.

Mitigating the Risks
Most probably, the intruder had a simple time getting into the house because it is not well guarded. A clever way of mitigating risks of this kind is to build a high-perimeter wall with electric wires. This security measure will greatly help in barring any intruder from entering the compound. Another way to mitigate risks is to hire good security guards who will observe the security of the building day and night. If the apartment has good security system, the intrusion would have been detected, even before the intruder got into Sharon’s house. The third way of mitigating the risk is by replacing the doors and windows with strong metallic doors and window panes. This will improve security since breaking them will take more time than breaking into an ordinary door.

In conclusion, the legal system has implemented many business laws that may help in dealing with the various business torts and instances of ethical violations. Through tort, criminal, and property law, local and national legal administrations are able to prevent violation of legal rights. In the future, adjustments to the current tort, criminal, and tort laws are needed to protect people’s civil and occupation rights from intruders.

  • Vazquez, P. (2016). Family Business Ethics: At the Crossroads of Business Ethics and Family Business. Journal of Business Ethics.
  • Kritzer, H. (2007). Defending Torts: What Should We Know? Journal of Tort Law, 1(3).
  • Sarch, A. (2015). Double Effect and the Criminal Law. Criminal Law and Philosophy.
  • Wilkof, N. (2013). Paradoxes and intellectual property law. Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 8(6), 423-423.