Q Paper on Legal Scenario following ethical principles and instead of breaching in a given working environment Home, - Legal Scenario Legal Scenario Management of Corporations In this case, it is found that the Parker and Philips have started a new company and are focusing on increasing their net sales. They are also conducting meetings with other tour operators so that they can develop a marketing plan to attract more customers to their resorts. It is also found that both the partners are on the equity of the firm and hence are looking for the expansion of the organization. But, it is also found that Philips has started a new firm without the knowledge and consent from Parker. Also, he is not following the principles of ethics and corporate governance in a given working environment. When Parker found this, he filed suit against the wrongful deeds performed by Philip as he noticed of breaching the Code of Law. Also, he has misused his position to get the contract; on the other hand, Philips claimed that he did not take the corporate opportunity since for Travel Brokers; it did not have the financial ability to undertake the contract with the CTA. Thus, considering this case scenario, it can be found that Philips has used his position to get the contract for his new company. Second, he did not follow the ethical principles and instead breached them in a given working environment of P & P resorts Inc. Also, he did not inform Parker about this and thus did not follow the ethical principles as identified in this case. It was important for Philips to discuss of his new venture with Parker, take his permission for conducting meetings with the CTA and thereby approach for the contract. However, without his consent, it seems that the agreement between both the entities was breached (Djemame et al., 2013). Hence, both from the legal perspective and from the ethical perspective, Philips' actions are not proper and hence he will lose the case. Parker will win this case as he is true and his remaining loyal with his company. He has even followed other associated legal principles to make sure that there are no breaches conducted by him in a given environment. Product Liability In this case, Allan is working as handyman but is also providing water heaters to the people. He is buying water heaters from Bradford Inc. and as per the needs of the people is providing them along with instructions and user's manual. It thereby ensures that the user needs to follow all the instructions with proper safety and also make sure that they do not breach any of the instructions provided in it. There were clear instructions mentioned on the heater that discussed about how to use the given water heater, what cautions need to be taken by the end-user and also there was a plate provided that had words "DANGER" printed above it. It also mentioned about water temperature levels that need to be maintained to avoid severe burns. Further, children, disabled people, and elderly people should use such systems with better ease to avoid being scalded. However, the next day, 3-year old Simon was bathed by his 12-year old sister Linda. When Linda received a text on her cell phone, she left Simon in the bath tub. Simon was thereby scalded with the hot water from the tap. Thus, reviewing this case, it can be found that first the instructions regarding the usage of the water heater was clearly mentioned. There were different warning signs provided and also a manual was provided so that the end-user can use this system in a better way. In addition, there were CAUTION and DANGER words highlighted in bold and big letters to make people read about it. Despite such instructions, Karla allowed her daughter to use the system on her own. It thereby resulted into this accident. On the other hand, Allan is not a licensed plumber and hence should not be conducting such activities. Also, Bradford Inc. should sell their products to only licensed plumbers to avoid such legal issues. Thus, in this case, neither of the party could win as both of them are at their respective faults (Apfelberg & Walsh, 2014). The Court of Law needs to warn all the entities and thereby provide them proper guidance to avoid such issues in the future.