Trespass on land, goods, and person is altogether the most common type of tort, but in all cases, the main concern is the allocation of responsibility for whatever losses are sustained. For anyone party to be held responsible for violation of the tort law, the claimant must establish that there is a duty of care and that there has been a breach of that duty to cause damage or loss to the claimant that needs to be compensated by an award of damages. There is a breach of the duty-of-care principle if the defendant is proven to have failed to do what a reasonable person will do in the situation presented.Francesca was a chambermaid of good standing at Hulton hotel until a regular hotel guest stormed into the manager’s office one day to accuse her of theft. The hotel regular Manon complained that he asked Francesca to redeem a ring worth 20,000-pound sterling from a downtown jeweler where it was taken for repairs. He never saw the chambermaid and the ring again. Obviously, Francesca kept the ring for herself and avoided Manon while continuing her duties at the hotel. In March, the hotel management dismissed Francesca for cause and brought a court case against her. She was convicted in August on several counts of theft after subsequent investigations revealed that she had stolen from other hotel guests before, although mostly involving items of smaller value. The hotel guest Manon, insisting that the hotel management shares responsibility for Francesca’s misdeed, is intent on suing the hotel, saying the establishment should answer to the law as well.The Occupier’s Liability Act in the UK expressly provides that any person like a shop owner who admits people into his premises owes a minimum duty of care to protect these people’s safety (MRL, 2003). This statutory tort applies to health and safety regulations across the workplace (Honore, 1995). In the case simulation at the bar, the Hulton hotel management admitted the man Manon into its premises as a hotel guest.