Fresha Trading Arm vs Family of the Bereaved Employees as a Civil and Case Study

Fresha Trading Arm vs Family of the Bereaved Employees as a Civil and Case Study Fresha Trading Arm vs Family of the Bereaved Employees as a Civil and Criminal Case â€" Case Study Example > The paper “ Fresha Trading Arm vs Family of the Bereaved Employees as a Civil and Criminal Case”   is a thrilling version of a   case study on the law. The law provides guidelines by which society lives by ensuring harmony and cohesion. The law aids in the nabbing of any criminal who violates the stipulated framework. Criminal law is a remarkable body of law that entirely handles crime. Criminal law regulates the act or omissions of an individual that would threaten, endanger, or even harm the lives or health of other people (Garland, McEwan 2012). On the other hand, criminal law differs from civil law as civil law concentrates on dispute resolution while criminal law concentrates on deterrence and retribution. However, any person who violates the criminal law doctrines, encounter serious consequences. Criminal law has five main objectives which include; retribution, incapacitation, restoration, rehabilitation, and deterrence. Criminal law has some elements which include; pr oof of a guilty act and the intent or the guilty mind. The guilty act revolves around the physical element in the crime. This would include a threat, action, omission to act. The person who permeates the physical action has to have a legal duty of care that arises through various means. The legal duty of care comes to be through a legal contract, a blood relation, a voluntary undertaking or through one’ s official position. On the other hand, a guilty mind implies that the wrongdoer had the intent to commit the crime (Criminal law 2012). This indicates that the crime had a motive, and this is evident as the wrongdoer is aware of the consequences of the actions but decides to go ahead. Strict liability accompanies the doctrine of the guilty mind. For any criminal case to hold a watertight case before a judge, the intent has to eminent. The intention of this paper is to illustrate the breaches laws, and the avenues open to the defendant’ s family. In addition, the evidence requi red before a state judge and how the company accused will defend itself against the allegations. The Fresha bakery and harvest time Ltd is commonly known as Fresha’ s trading arm are facing charges under the health and safety at work Act. Employment is a legal contract binding both the employee and the employer. This implies that the employment contract is enforceable by law in case of any discrepancies. In addition to the common law doctrines governing employment, law practitioners have an employment code of conduct. The employees' code of conduct seeks to regulate the employment contract and enhance the employees' rights and freedoms. The health and safety Act approve a code of practice with certain practical regulations. These regulations thoroughly define the employment contract in totality. The provisions of the health and safety act clearly define the place of work, the employer, the premises, the plant, and equipment as well as the employees (Klein Grobey 2012). The fundamental objective relayed by the health and safety Act is the provision that each and every employee has a duty to ensure that the place of work is safe. This implies that the employer has to have the welfare of the employees in mind and ensure that their health is not at any risk whatsoever. The health and safety Acts bind the employer to provide a safe working environment away from any hazards. Additionally, in the case of imminent danger, the employer has to relay efficient information to employees and provide them with safety equipment. On the other hand, the employees have to take sufficient care to negate any health risks. This implies that the employees have to avoid any risky situations to the best of their ability and knowledge.