Practice question
A race organizer anticipates vehicles entering an organized route but fails to put in place reasonably adequate protection for runners. A foreseeable traffic collision then causes injury. The organizer relies solely on a general briefing and a participant's route awareness as proof of its own due care. Which analysis accords with Abrogar?
- A briefing automatically proves all protective duties were discharged
- The actual adequacy of protective measures remains necessary; participant awareness alone does not establish organizer diligence
- Every sports organizer is an insurer of all possible harm
- A waiver necessarily cures every negligent omission
- Foreseeability is never relevant
Legal references
- Civil Code Articles 1173, 2176, 2178 and 2180: https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1949/ra_386_1949.html
- Abrogar v. Cosmos Bottling Company, GR 164749, March 15, 2017, main decision: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/mar2017/gr_164749_2017.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.