Introduction to Law: cram pack

A seller says the farms are "fully let" but does not mention that the tenants have given notice to leave. This is:

1. AA misrepresentation by half-truth
2. BA mere puff with no legal effect
3. CMere silence, which is never actionable
4. DA statement of opinion only

A buyer purchases oats thinking they are old oats. The seller knows they are new, but made no statement or promise that they were old. Under Smith v Hughes:

1. AThe contract is binding, because a mistake about quality alone is not enough
2. BThe seller had a duty to correct the buyer
3. CThe contract is void for unilateral mistake
4. DThe contract is voidable, because the seller's silence amounted to a misrepresentation

Auditors negligently certify a company's accounts. An investor relies on them to buy more shares and suffers loss. In Caparo v Dickman, the auditors:

1. AOwed a duty because the investor was a shareholder
2. BOwed a duty to anyone relying on the accounts
3. CWere strictly liable for errors in the accounts
4. DOwed no duty to the investor for this purpose

A tannery spills small amounts of solvent over many years. It seeps underground and contaminates a water company's borehole, which nobody could have foreseen. In Cambridge Water v Eastern Counties Leather:

1. AThe water company was barred by contributory negligence
2. BThe tannery was liable in negligence instead
3. CThe tannery was liable, because Rylands liability is strict and needs no foreseeability
4. DThe tannery was not liable, because the type of damage was not foreseeable

In Pickin v British Railways Board, the House of Lords held that courts:

1. AWill not examine whether Parliament followed its internal procedures in passing an Act
2. BCan strike down a private Act if it is shown that Parliament was misled during its passage
3. CCan review Acts for compliance with private bill rules
4. DMust investigate any allegation of fraud in Parliament

In R (Nicklinson) v Ministry of Justice (2014), concerning the ban on assisted suicide, the majority of the UK Supreme Court:

1. ADeclined to make a declaration of incompatibility at that time, leaving it to Parliament
2. BHeld that Article 8 was not engaged at all
3. CRead the ban down under section 3 to allow assisted dying
4. DMade a declaration of incompatibility with Article 8, while leaving the ban itself in force for now

Gang members threaten D to make her rob a post office. D had joined the gang knowing it used violence. Following R v Hasan, D:

1. ACan rely on necessity instead of duress
2. BCan rely on duress only if the robbery failed
3. CCan rely on duress because the threat was real, immediate and impossible for her to escape
4. DCannot rely on duress because she voluntarily associated with violent criminals

In R v Cunningham (1957), D tore a gas meter off a wall to steal money; gas leaked and poisoned a neighbour. The court held "maliciously" means:

1. AActing in a way that is against the law
2. BActing with wickedness or ill will towards the victim, as in ordinary usage
3. CFailing to notice a risk an ordinary person would see
4. DIntending the harm or foreseeing the risk of it and taking it anyway

The European Parliament can force the whole Commission to resign through:

1. AA simple majority vote of the Council
2. BA judgment of the Court of Justice
3. CA unanimous decision of the European Council
4. DA motion of censure passed by a two-thirds majority of votes cast, representing a majority of MEPs

In Opinion 2/13 (2014), the Court of Justice held that the draft agreement on EU accession to the ECHR:

1. AWas incompatible with the Treaties, in part because it threatened the autonomy of EU law
2. BWas compatible with the Treaties, provided the Council approved it unanimously after consulting Parliament
3. CCould only be ratified by a referendum in each state
4. DWas unnecessary because the EU had already acceded