This essay will be designed to test the student’s research skills and deal with a practical real life scenario in a corporate law context. The student will need to be aware of and have a good...

Introduction
Corporate liability is subjected to have precision in terms of taking decisions i.e. the
esponsibility becomes bigger as someone upholds the system from top management authority.
The corporate law across globe has directed to some guidelines, according to the demographics
and working conditions of the nation, which function and necessitate the expectations of a
workplace in terms of both, employee and the common consumers. The recent issue of Sydney
airport is an example of corporate liability and its failure in accomplishing the task of proper
functioning of the whole system the torts of negligence and misinterpretation both applied to this
specific situation and the consumers, the passengers in this system obviously, had to suffer the
delay in flights for the whole day. It was a point which was miscommunication from the sky to
the ATC at the ground and it resulted in the failure of providing the quality service to the
consumers.
The Case Background
The issue started in the early morning of Monday when there was a technological failure
due to which, the discussion between the pilot and ATC went on air; it was more like a software
failure because of which the entire Sydney airport became a place of chaos. The malfunctioning
of the software started around 5 am in the morning when the flight Qantas 565 pilot asked the
ATC to provide clearance to the runway so that the flight may touchdown. The response of the
client actually went on air and in the lounge of the airport, everyone heard this conversation
which curiosity. The ATC replied to the pilot as “Pilot (getting ready for take-off): Confirming
we can expect [runway] 16 right for departure?
Controller: Qantas 565 ah no, nothing at this stage. There's been a total radar failure within the
Sydney basin, so it's a nationwide ground stop. The only a
ivals that are being processed are
those that are ai
orne, and I don't believe we're accepting any departures until the radar's back
online.
Pilot: The estimate of the delay?
Controller: You got a piece of string?
Pilot: Fair enough.
Controller: The techs are working on it. Every time it reboots it locks up again so, ah yeah, until
it's reliable there'll be no movements.” (M Business News, 2017)
Thus, this whole discussion—which should have been kept confidential—went on air and it
actually resulted in a panic situation at the airport itself. It was more like a responsibility which
would have been controlled, had there was no negligent behavior found on behalf of the ATC
professionals.
The Tort of Negligence and the Case
At first, in the light of the above mentioned conversation, it is probable to apply the
corporate law situation because Sydney is definitely one of the busiest airports of the world.
Already, the situation at any airport especially dealing with the international flight becomes
sensitive. The ground staff and the other departments has to work with high priority by
emaining on the edges of their seats. There is no point of making any fault in the system which
may rise the panic situation without any well grounded purpose. The tort of negligence applies in
this case because the ATC did not notice that their conversation was on the air because of the
total radar failure. In spite of unknown situation, the ATC might have cross...