Introduction to Law: cram pack

Damages for breach of contract are generally meant to:

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

A rogue uses a stolen driving licence to take a car on written hire-purchase in another person's name. In Shogun Finance v Hudson, the majority of the House of Lords held:

1. AThe contract was valid with the rogue himself
2. BThe contract was voidable, so a later buyer got good title
3. CThe contract was void, because the finance company dealt only with the named person
4. DThe contract was void, because hire-purchase agreements must always be made face to face

Rylands v Fletcher liability concerns:

1. AMedical negligence
2. BLiability for any harm caused by careless use of land, even without escape
3. CEscape of a dangerous thing brought onto land in a non-natural use
4. DDefamation in newspapers

A tall new building blocks television reception for many nearby homes. In Hunter v Canary Wharf, the House of Lords held:

1. AThere was a nuisance, but only the council could sue
2. BThere was no actionable nuisance, and only those with an interest in land could sue
3. CThere was a nuisance, and all residents, including family members and lodgers, could sue
4. DThere was no nuisance, as nuisance requires noise

Under the UK Human Rights Act 1998, if a court cannot read an Act compatibly with Convention rights, it can:

1. AMake a declaration of incompatibility, leaving the Act in force
2. BRefer the case to the European Court of Human Rights automatically
3. CStrike down the Act immediately
4. DOrder Parliament to amend the Act within a month

The "margin of appreciation" doctrine of the European Court of Human Rights means that:

1. AStates have some discretion in how they protect rights, especially on sensitive moral issues
2. BStates may disregard Strasbourg judgments whenever their own parliament disagrees with the outcome
3. CEvery state must apply identical rules
4. DThe Court never reviews national decisions

D points a gun at his friend as a joke, both believing it will not fire. It fires and kills the friend. Following R v Lamb, there was no unlawful act manslaughter because:

1. AThe gun belonged to the friend
2. BThe death was caused by the gun malfunctioning, not by any act of D's
3. CThere was no assault, since the friend did not apprehend any force
4. DJokes cannot be criminal under English law

In Sweet v Parsley (1970), a landlady was convicted of being concerned in the management of premises used for smoking cannabis. The House of Lords:

1. AQuashed the conviction, holding that mens rea is presumed unless Parliament clearly excludes it
2. BHeld that cannabis offences require a commercial purpose
3. CUpheld the conviction because drug offences are always strict liability in order to protect public health
4. DHeld that landladies have a duty to search their tenants

In Brasserie du Pêcheur and Factortame III (1996), the Court held that state liability:

1. ACan arise from acts of the national legislature, if the breach is sufficiently serious
2. BNever applies to acts of a national parliament
3. COnly arises from failure to transpose a directive, not from other acts of the national legislature
4. DRequires proof that the state acted intentionally

In Inter-Environnement Wallonie (1997), the Court held that during the transposition period of a directive, member states:

1. AMay ask the Commission to extend the deadline indefinitely
2. BMust refrain from adopting measures liable to seriously compromise the result the directive prescribes
3. CMust already apply the directive in full
4. DAre free to adopt any measure until the deadline expires, even one directly contrary to the directive's aims