Introduction to Law: cram pack

A sailor is to be paid only on completing a voyage, but dies part of the way. Under the strict rule applied in Cutter v Powell:

1. AThe ship owner had to pay compensation
2. BNothing was recoverable for the part performed
3. CThe full wages were payable
4. DA proportion of the wages was payable

A posts an offer. A week later A posts a revocation. B receives the offer and immediately accepts by telegram, and only later receives the revocation. Applying Byrne v Van Tienhoven:

1. AThere was no contract, because the revocation was posted before B's acceptance was sent
2. BA contract was made only when B received the revocation
3. CThere was no contract, because offers by post can be revoked at any time
4. DA contract was made when B accepted, because the revocation had not yet arrived

Strict liability means a defendant can be liable:

1. AOnly if they acted intentionally
2. BOnly if they broke a contract
3. COnly for criminal acts
4. DWithout proof of fault

After a workplace injury weakens his leg, a man walks down steep stairs with no handrail while carrying a child, his leg gives way, and he jumps and breaks his ankle. In McKew v Holland and Hannen and Cubitts:

1. AHis unreasonable conduct broke the chain of causation
2. BThe employer was liable for the ankle injury as a foreseeable result
3. CThe employer was liable for half of the ankle injury
4. DThe stairs' owner was solely liable

Ellen Street Estates v Minister of Health is cited for the principle that:

1. AEarlier Acts always prevail over later Acts
2. BCourts may refuse to apply a later Act
3. CParliament can entrench an Act against later repeal by stating expressly that it may not be amended in future
4. DParliament cannot bind its successors, and a later Act impliedly repeals an inconsistent earlier one

The Wednesbury unreasonableness test asks whether a decision is:

1. AUnpopular with the public
2. BSlightly less than ideal
3. CDifferent from what the judge would have decided on the same evidence
4. DSo unreasonable that no reasonable authority could have made it

D and V are playing a properly organised rugby match. D tackles V within the rules and V breaks a leg. D is most likely:

1. ANot liable, because players consent to injuries within the rules of the game
2. BLiable, because rugby is not a recognised sport
3. CLiable for GBH, because a serious injury was caused
4. DLiable for battery, because consent is never a defence to serious bodily harm

In R v Hancock and Shankland (1986), striking miners pushed a concrete block onto a taxi, killing the driver. The House of Lords held:

1. AThe miners intended to kill because death was their aim
2. BForesight of a high probability is evidence from which intention may be inferred, but is not intention itself
3. CForesight of a high probability of death or serious injury is conclusive proof of intention as a matter of law
4. DIntention can never be inferred from foresight

The "public service" exception in Article 45(4) TFEU covers:

1. AAll jobs in the public sector, including those of nurses, teachers and railway workers employed by the state
2. BPosts involving the exercise of public power and safeguarding the general interests of the state
3. CAny job paid for by public funds
4. DJobs in companies that have government contracts

In Commission v Italy (Art Treasures, 1968), Italy taxed the export of artistic and historical works. The Court held that:

1. AArt is not "goods", so the free movement rules did not apply
2. BExport taxes are outside the scope of the customs union
3. CThe tax was a charge having equivalent effect and was prohibited regardless of its purpose
4. DThe tax was justified under Article 36 to protect national treasures of artistic or historic value