In this case, there are two main legal issues. The first one is the breach of reservation. The reservation is a form of oral or written contract, when the guest or the restaurants breach the contract, they may be liable. Every restaurant has a rule that if the guests don’t arrive after the certain period ruled, the reservation will be canceled. In fact, if the guests arrived late, the reservation contract will be canceled, because guests do not arrive by that time the hotel or restaurant ruled, they have breached the reservation contract and been considered no-show, and in this case, the hotel or restaurant is not liable. If the guests breach the reservation, and they influence the restaurant’s business, the guests have legal liability.
In this case, the restaurant breached the reservation contract, so the restaurant has legal liability. According to Florida Law, once a hotel reservation made and confirmed, it constitutes a contract and binds hotel to provide accommodations. In addition, Hotels sometimes overbook, for those guests the hotel cannot house, it will be in breach of contract and liable for damages. Therefore, the guests can sue the restaurant about breach of contract. The restaurant cannot cancel the reservation contract if the contract is in the period of validity. Besides, Florida State passed a law that says hotels will be fined if they deny space to any guest who has guaranteed a reservation by paying a deposit. In this case, if the guest paid a deposit, the restaurant needed to pay the fine, too.
The second legal issue is that the restaurant has negligence of allergic issues. According to Florida law, an owner/operator owes a business invitee the duty to use reasonable care in maintaining the premises in a reasonably safe condition. See Berman v. Weberman Caterers, Inc., 647 So.2d 1068 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994); Emmons v. Baptist Hosp., 478 So.2d 440, 442 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). But in this case, when the servers served the appetizers to guests, they didn’t consider the allergic issues. Therefore, the restaurant failed to use reasonable care in maintaining the premises in a reasonably safe condition. Certainly, if the servers told the guest that the main ingredients in the appetizer or asked whether there was food the guests was allergic, but the guest still eat the food when he or she knew that the food was allergic to him or her, the restaurant will not be liable.
According to Florida Law, the restaurant has duty to warn of an inherent danger in product arises when product has dangerous propensities. Certainly, in this case, the manager or the servers have duty to tell the guests about the food ingredients, and ask them whether they were allergic to the food. In this case, the restaurant didn’t have strict liability, because the servers or the manager didn’t serve allergic food to the guest on purpose. Hence, the manager was negligent with the allergic issues. Indeed, one of the guests was allergic because of the negligence of the restaurant, but the restaurant has no strict liability.
Florida Court Possible Decision
About the reservation issues, the Florida court may decide to enable the restaurant to compensate the damage if the guests can provide the evidence that there are damages caused by the breach of reservation directly. On the contrast, if the guests cannot offer evidence to prove they have damaged caused by reservation, there is no liability of the restaurant. So this legal issue depends on the real damages of the guests.
About the negligence issues, the Florida court may decide to enable the restaurant to compensate the damage of the allergic guest, because the restaurant manager was negligent to remind the guest of the allergic guests. But if the guest didn’t know he or she was allergic to the food, or the guest knew that there was allergic food in the appetizer, he or she still ate it, the restaurant will not be liable.