Case 3 Luxury Fur farms for many years operated a mink ranch in a farming area near a municipal airport. Due to the growth of the city, a new runway was constructed that would allow larger aircraft to use the airport. The runway was constructed in a direction such that aircraft approaching the runway would fly directly over the building that housed the mink. If cloud or fog condition required the pilots to fly to the south of their normal approach path.
Because mink will devour their young if a loud noise occurs, Luxury Fur Farms had the words 'MINK RANCH" painted on the roof of their barn in large, 20-foot letters that were clearly visible to air-craft in the air. A warning of the existence of the ranch was also reported in the pilot flight information manuals, advising pilots not to fly low over the buildings.
Shortly after the new runway was constructed, weather condition required Ace Airlines Flight 120 to approach the airport on a path directly over the mink ranch. The noise of the aircraft caused a great many of the mink to kill and eat their young, and Luxury Fur Farms suffered a substantial loss.
At the trial of the case, the pilot of the plane admitted that he was unaware of the location of the mink ranch. Hel also stated that he had not examined the flight information manual that identified the location of the mink ranch
Discuss the nature of this case, the claim of Luxury Fur Farms, and the defence, if any, that might be raised by the airline. Render a decision.
Case 4
A golf club constructed a driving range on its property that face a number of residential properties located next to the golf course. Golfers using the driving range frequently hit golf balls into the back-yards of the neighbouring residential properties and, on several occasions, broke windows in the houses located on the lots. On one occasion, a golf ball struck and killed a cat that had been sleeping on a bench in one of the backyards.
The residential property owners complained to the club about the golf balls being driven into their properties, but the club refused to change the location of the driving range. In response to the complaints, the club stated that the individual golfers that caused the damage should be responsible since they hit the balls into the yards
When the club refused to stop the use of the driving range, the property owners decided to institute legal proceedings against the club.
Discuss the nature of the action and the arguments of the parties, and render a decision.

Case 5
A fast food restaurant operated a "drive-thru" service that allowed motorist to purchase food iteams and drinks without leaving their vehicles. The restaurant was well known for the quality of the coffee that it served, and much of its business reputation was based on this fact. Restaurant advertising was designed to capitalize on its business reputation which advertised as "the best and hottest coffee in town"
One evening, a customer who frequently bought coffee at the restaurant purchased a large coffee from the drive-thru of the operation. When she received the coffee container, she place it between her knees on the car seat and attempted to drive away. Unfortunately, when she moved her leg to press on the accelerator, the coffee spilled, causing serious burned to both knees. She was unable to work for over a week while her injuries healed and decided to take legal action against the restaurant.
Outline the nature of her claim, and speculate as to the arguments that she and the restaurant owner might make to support their respective sides of the case. Render a decision.