Introduction to Law: cram pack

Damages for breach of contract are generally meant to:

1. APut the innocent party in the position as if the contract had been performed
2. BGive the innocent party a profit beyond their loss
3. CReturn both parties only to the position they were in before the contract was made
4. DPunish the party in breach

A builder agrees to finish work for an agreed price, then demands more money. The client pays to avoid delay and gets a practical benefit. In English law (Williams v Roffey), the promise to pay more may be:

1. AA criminal offence
2. BEnforceable only if made in writing
3. CUnenforceable, because performing an existing contractual duty can never be good consideration
4. DEnforceable, because the practical benefit can be consideration if there is no duress

The "but for" test is used to establish:

1. ARemoteness of damage
2. BDuty of care
3. CThe standard of care
4. DFactual causation

A petrol station kiosk attendant racially abuses a customer, follows him outside and assaults him. In Mohamud v WM Morrison Supermarkets, the employer was:

1. ANot liable, because the assault took place outside the kiosk and after the conversation ended
2. BVicariously liable, as the assault was closely connected to his job of serving customers
3. CNot liable, because violence was not part of his job
4. DLiable only if it had trained him poorly

The Dutch Constitution (Article 120) forbids courts from:

1. AApplying international treaties
2. BHearing criminal cases
3. CReviewing Acts of Parliament for compatibility with the Constitution
4. DReviewing decisions of municipalities and provinces against national statutes

In the Case of Proclamations (1610), the court held that the King:

1. ACould suspend Acts of Parliament
2. BCould not create new offences by proclamation
3. CCould change any law by proclamation
4. DCould dismiss judges who disagreed

D buys a substance believing it is heroin and intends to sell it on. In fact it is harmless powder. Following R v Shivpuri, D is:

1. AGuilty of attempt, as impossibility is no defence under the 1981 Act
2. BNot guilty, because attempting the impossible is no offence under the 1981 Act
3. CNot guilty, because the substance was harmless
4. DGuilty of the full offence of dealing drugs

In the Dutch "Melk-en-water" judgment (Hoge Raad, 1916), the court recognised:

1. AConditional intent as a form of intention
2. BForce majeure as a written justification
3. CAbsence of all blame (AVAS) as an unwritten excuse
4. DThe legality principle as part of the Constitution

Under Article 51 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, the Charter binds member states:

1. ANever, as it binds only the EU institutions
2. BIn all their activities, including purely national matters
3. COnly when their constitution allows it
4. DOnly when they are implementing EU law

In Mangold (2005) and Kücükdeveci (2010), the Court allowed an individual to rely on EU law against a private employer because:

1. AThe prohibition of age discrimination is a general principle of EU law, given expression in a directive
2. BThe directive on equal treatment in employment had horizontal direct effect in itself after the transposition deadline
3. CThe national law had been annulled by the Commission
4. DThe employer was an emanation of the state