Question

Прочитайте текст и напишите решение этой задачи на английском языке(речь идет о краже) Lebedev sued the hotel "Skypoint" for the recovery of the value of the things that were stolen from him during his stay in the hotel. The theft was committed from the room in which Lebedev and other people lived (4-bed room). The representative of the hotel did not accept the claim, referring to the order of the administration, according to which the hotel is not responsible for the loss of items not submitted for storage. Lebedev was familiarized with rules.

Answer 1

I think that it was necessary to go immediately to the police

Answer 2

Title: Legal Dispute: Lebedev vs. Hotel "Skypoint" over Theft

Summary: Lebedev has filed a lawsuit against the hotel "Skypoint," seeking compensation for the value of the items stolen from his room during his stay. The theft occurred in a 4-bed room where Lebedev and others were residing. However, the hotel's representative rejected the claim, citing the hotel administration's policy, which states that the hotel is not liable for the loss of items that were not submitted for storage. Lebedev claims that he was aware of the hotel's rules.

Background: Lebedev stayed at the hotel "Skypoint" along with other individuals in a 4-bed room. During his stay, some of his belongings were stolen from his room. Following the incident, Lebedev decided to take legal action against the hotel to recover the value of the stolen items.

Hotel's Defense: The hotel's representative refused to accept the claim, arguing that their administration has a policy in place which states that the hotel is not responsible for any losses of personal belongings that were not submitted for storage. It is common practice for hotels to have such policies in order to limit their liability for guests' belongings.

Lebedev's Position: Lebedev asserts that he was indeed aware of the hotel's rules, but he still believes the hotel should be held accountable for the theft. His contention may be based on the argument that the hotel's security measures should have prevented unauthorized access to guests' rooms, regardless of whether items were submitted for storage or not.

Potential Legal Points:

1. Duty of Care: Lebedev may argue that the hotel has a duty of care towards its guests, which includes ensuring the safety and security of their belongings, regardless of whether they were submitted for storage or not.

2. Hotel's Liability Policy: The hotel's policy regarding non-liability for items not submitted for storage needs to be examined to see if it was adequately communicated to the guests and if it complies with relevant laws and regulations.

3. Security Measures: The adequacy of the hotel's security measures will also be an essential aspect of the case. If it is found that the hotel did not have reasonable security measures in place, Lebedev's position may strengthen.

4. Shared Room: The fact that the theft occurred in a 4-bed room shared with other individuals might complicate matters. It may be necessary to establish whether the stolen items were exclusively Lebedev's property and if any responsibility lies with the hotel in safeguarding individual belongings in a shared accommodation setup.

Resolution: The court will have to consider both parties' arguments and examine any relevant evidence, including the hotel's security protocols, communication of their liability policy, and Lebedev's knowledge of these policies. The final decision will depend on the application of relevant laws and regulations and the assessment of the hotel's level of responsibility in ensuring the security of its guests' belongings.