Introduction to Law: cram pack

Formula sheets, the key method steps for every topic and 10 practice problems, with full solutions at the back.

New problemsBack to the course

In the print window, choose “Save as PDF” to keep a copy on your device.

1Practice problems

1.Contract lawMedium

A boiler is delivered late to a laundry. The seller knew it was needed for the business but not about especially lucrative dyeing contracts. Under Victoria Laundry v Newman, the laundry recovers:

  1. AOnly the price it paid for the boiler
  2. BNothing, because all lost profits are too remote
  3. CAll lost profits, including those from the especially lucrative dyeing contracts
  4. DOrdinary lost profits, but not the profits from the special contracts
2.Contract lawHard

In a face-to-face sale, a rogue falsely claims to be a famous actor, pays with a worthless cheque, and sells the car on to an innocent buyer. Under Lewis v Averay, the first contract was:

  1. AVoid for mistake, so the innocent buyer got no title
  2. BVoid, because cheques cannot pay for cars
  3. CValid, and the seller could only sue the rogue in tort
  4. DVoidable for fraud, so the innocent buyer got good title
3.Tort lawMedium

The Caparo test for a new duty of care requires:

  1. AForeseeability of harm, proximity and that it is fair, just and reasonable to impose a duty
  2. BA contract between the parties, a breach of its terms and loss flowing directly from the breach
  3. CIntention, motive and damage
  4. DProof of criminal conduct
4.Tort lawHard

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

Under British Oxygen v Minister of Technology, a public body that adopts a policy for exercising its discretion must:

  1. AHave the policy approved by Parliament
  2. BApply the policy rigidly in every case to ensure consistent treatment
  3. CMake no policy at all
  4. DStill be willing to listen to anyone with something new to say
6.Constitutional lawHard

In Brown v Board of Education (1954), the US Supreme Court held that racial segregation in public schools:

  1. AViolated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment
  2. BWas constitutional so long as the separate facilities were of equal quality
  3. CViolated only the First Amendment
  4. DWas a matter for each state alone
7.Criminal lawMedium

D is present when a crime is committed but does nothing to help or encourage it. Following R v Clarkson, D is:

  1. AThe principal, because D witnessed the whole crime
  2. BNot an accessory, because mere presence without intent to encourage is not enough
  3. CAn accessory, because voluntary presence at the scene always amounts to encouragement
  4. DAn accessory, because D could have called the police
8.Criminal lawHard

In R v Cheshire, the court held that negligent medical treatment of a gunshot victim:

  1. AAlways breaks the chain of causation
  2. BMakes the doctors liable for murder
  3. CBroke the chain of causation whenever it was negligent enough to be the immediate medical cause of death, even if the wound still operated
  4. DDid not break the chain of causation unless it was so independent and potent that the original wound became insignificant
9.EU lawMedium

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

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

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

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

2Solutions

1.Contract law

Answer: D · Ordinary lost profits, but not the profits from the special contracts

Why this is the answer

Jurisdiction: law of England and Wales. Ordinary profits were within reasonable contemplation; the exceptional contracts were not, because the seller had no knowledge of them.

Answer

D · Ordinary lost profits, but not the profits from the special contracts
2.Contract law

Answer: D · Voidable for fraud, so the innocent buyer got good title

Why this is the answer

Jurisdiction: law of England and Wales. In face-to-face dealings there is a strong presumption that the seller intends to deal with the person present. The contract is voidable for fraud, and a buyer in good faith before avoidance takes good title.

Answer

D · Voidable for fraud, so the innocent buyer got good title
3.Tort law

Answer: A · Foreseeability of harm, proximity and that it is fair, just and reasonable to impose a duty

Why this is the answer

Jurisdiction: law of England and Wales. Caparo v Dickman set out foreseeability, proximity and fairness; courts now develop duties incrementally by analogy with existing cases.

Answer

A · Foreseeability of harm, proximity and that it is fair, just and reasonable to impose a duty
4.Tort law

Answer: B · There was no actionable nuisance, and only those with an interest in land could sue

Why this is the answer

Jurisdiction: law of England and Wales. The mere presence of a building blocking reception is not an actionable private nuisance. The Lords also held that private nuisance protects rights in land, so only those with a proprietary interest or exclusive possession can sue.

Answer

B · There was no actionable nuisance, and only those with an interest in land could sue
5.Constitutional law

Answer: D · Still be willing to listen to anyone with something new to say

Why this is the answer

Jurisdiction: law of England and Wales. Policies are lawful and promote consistency, but the decision-maker must not shut its ears to applications. It must be ready to consider exceptions.

Answer

D · Still be willing to listen to anyone with something new to say
6.Constitutional law

Answer: A · Violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment

Why this is the answer

Jurisdiction: United States law. The Court held that separate educational facilities are inherently unequal, rejecting Plessy v Ferguson's "separate but equal" doctrine in public education.

Answer

A · Violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment
7.Criminal law

Answer: B · Not an accessory, because mere presence without intent to encourage is not enough

Why this is the answer

Jurisdiction: law of England and Wales. Presence at a crime can be evidence of encouragement, but liability requires actual encouragement and an intention to encourage.

Answer

B · Not an accessory, because mere presence without intent to encourage is not enough
8.Criminal law

Answer: D · Did not break the chain of causation unless it was so independent and potent that the original wound became insignificant

Why this is the answer

Jurisdiction: law of England and Wales. Medical negligence rarely breaks the chain; the defendant remains liable if their act still contributed significantly to the death.

Answer

D · Did not break the chain of causation unless it was so independent and potent that the original wound became insignificant
9.EU law

Answer: B · Posts involving the exercise of public power and safeguarding the general interests of the state

Why this is the answer

Jurisdiction: EU law. The exception covers only posts that involve exercising powers conferred by public law, such as in the police or judiciary, not public sector employment in general.

Answer

B · Posts involving the exercise of public power and safeguarding the general interests of the state
10.EU law

Answer: D · Was incompatible with the Treaties, in part because it threatened the autonomy of EU law

Why this is the answer

Jurisdiction: EU law. The Court identified problems with autonomy, mutual trust, its exclusive jurisdiction (Article 344 TFEU) and the CFSP, so the agreement could not enter into force in that form.

Answer

D · Was incompatible with the Treaties, in part because it threatened the autonomy of EU law

ExamProblems · examproblems.com/courses/introduction-to-law