can you answer like this 'The most applicable tort in this scenario is the tort of negligence. Negligence arises when a person or organization fails to take reasonable care to avoid causing harm to others. In order to succeed in a negligence claim, a plaintiff must prove that a duty of care existed, that the duty was breached, that the breach caused the harm, and that damages were suffered. While the detailed breakdown of these elements will be addressed in Question 1(b), the tort of negligence clearly forms the basis of Maura Blake's claim. In this case, Totspace, a daycare facility, had an established duty to provide safe and adequate supervision to children under its care, including Maura's son Linus. Ken Andrews, as a counsellor and employee of Totspace, had a direct role in managing Linus during the outing and may be found personally liable for his decisions. Specifically, Ken's decision to allow Linus to run off unsupervised without confirming the presence of another staff member could be considered a serious lapse in professional judgment. Totspace may also be held vicariously liable for Ken Andrews' actions. Under the legal doctrine of respondeat superior, an employer can be held responsible for torts committed by its employees during the course of their employment. Since Ken was acting within the scope of his job duties at the time of the incident, any negligence on his part may legally transfer liability to Totspace. Conclusion: Maura Blake can bring a civil action