2012-蘑菇视频AT-217, Rahimi
In her appeal, the Appellant contended that the Organisation owed her a duty of care as a result of the actions of its representatives. 蘑菇视频AT noted that the Appellant did not produce any evidence that the invoked injury was the result of negligence or fraud caused by a specific act or omission of the 蘑菇视频 or one of its representatives, or of the fact that the Organisation was aware of the fraud prior to the Appellant’s allegations. 蘑菇视频AT held that the Appellant’s claim for damages could not be entertained as there was no nexus between the fraud and the 蘑菇视频, nor was the Organisation aware of the...