Introduction to Law: cram pack

An actress agrees to act only for one studio and not for any other during the contract. She leaves to act for a rival. The court is most likely to:

1. ARefuse any remedy, as personal services are involved
2. BOrder her to pay the rival's profits to the court
3. CGrant an injunction stopping her acting for the rival
4. DOrder her to perform her contract with the studio

A chartered ship is returned late, and the owner loses a very profitable follow-on charter. In The Achilleas, the House of Lords held the charterer was liable:

1. AFor punitive damages, because the delay was deliberate
2. BOnly for the market rate difference during the overrun period
3. CFor the whole profit lost on the follow-on charter, as it was foreseeable
4. DFor no loss, because late return is not a breach

Patients are paralysed by anaesthetic contaminated through invisible cracks in glass ampoules, a risk unknown to doctors at the time. Under Roe v Minister of Health, the hospital was:

1. AStrictly liable for any harm from drugs
2. BNegligent, judged by the medical knowledge available at trial
3. CNot negligent, judged by the knowledge available at the time
4. DNegligent, because harm occurred in hospital

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

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

1. AMust investigate any allegation of fraud in Parliament
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. DWill not examine whether Parliament followed its internal procedures in passing an Act

In YL v Birmingham City Council (2007), the House of Lords held that a private care home housing residents funded by a council:

1. AWas a core public authority
2. BWas not exercising a function of a public nature under the Human Rights Act
3. CWas a hybrid public authority bound by the Act for all the care it provided
4. DCould not house publicly funded residents

D, being pursued by armed police, uses V as a human shield and fires at the officers. The police return fire and kill V. Following R v Pagett, D is:

1. ANot liable, because the police officers' decision to fire was a free, deliberate and informed intervening act
2. BNot liable, because V's death was not foreseeable to D
3. CLiable, because the police acted reasonably in self-defence and did not break the chain of causation
4. DLiable only if the police officers are also convicted

In R v Walkington (1979), D went behind a shop counter and opened a till. This was burglary because:

1. AThe till contained money at the time
2. BD was carrying a weapon at the time
3. CShops are treated as dwellings in law
4. DEntering a part of a building as a trespasser is enough

In Commission v Ireland ("Buy Irish", 1982), a campaign promoting Irish products breached Article 34 because:

1. AIt was run by private companies without state involvement
2. BIt was a state-supported measure capable of influencing traders to prefer domestic goods
3. CIt imposed a charge having equivalent effect to a customs duty on goods imported from other member states
4. DIt set quotas on goods from other member states

In Defrenne v Sabena (No 2), the Court held that the principle of equal pay for men and women (now Article 157 TFEU):

1. AHas no direct effect
2. BRequires a directive before it can be applied
3. CApplies only to public employers
4. DHas both vertical and horizontal direct effect