Introduction to Law: cram pack

An actor withdraws from a TV film and the company cannot prove what profit the film would have made. It may claim:

1. APunitive damages to deter the actor
2. BOnly nominal damages of a small sum
3. CIts wasted expenditure, including costs incurred before the contract
4. DIts estimated profits from the film, even if they are purely speculative

In Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co, the court held that the advertisement was:

1. AA contract only with the newspaper
2. BA mere advertising puff with no legal effect, since no one could take it seriously
3. CAn invitation to treat
4. DA unilateral offer that could be accepted by performing the conditions

The Wagon Mound case concerns which issue?

1. ARemoteness: only reasonably foreseeable types of damage are recoverable
2. BStrict liability for animals
3. CDuty of care to unborn children
4. DDirectness: a defendant is liable for all direct consequences of the breach

Members of a religious teaching order abused pupils at schools. The brothers were not employees of the order. In Various Claimants v Catholic Child Welfare Society, the Supreme Court held the order:

1. ALiable only in contract to the schools
2. BVicariously liable, as the relationship was akin to employment
3. CNot liable, because the order did not own the schools
4. DNot liable, because the brothers were not employees

In R (Jackson) v Attorney General, the House of Lords held that:

1. AThe House of Lords could veto any bill permanently
2. BThe Parliament Act 1949 and the Hunting Act 2004 passed under it were valid
3. CThe Hunting Act was incompatible with Convention rights
4. DActs passed under the Parliament Acts were merely invalid delegated legislation

A statute says a commission's "determination ... shall not be called in question in any court of law". In Anisminic v Foreign Compensation Commission, the House of Lords held:

1. AThe clause was invalid as unconstitutional
2. BThe clause excluded all judicial review
3. CThe clause did not protect a decision based on an error of law, because that was a nullity
4. DThe decision was immune from review because the ouster clause applied to all its determinations

The "thin skull" rule in criminal law means:

1. AA frail victim breaks the chain of causation
2. BOnly healthy victims are protected
3. CThe victim's injuries must be foreseeable in extent
4. DThe defendant must take the victim as they find them

Under the "transferred malice" doctrine, if A aims a blow at B but hits C:

1. AB becomes liable for the harm to C
2. BA's intention towards B is transferred, so A can be liable for the harm to C
3. CA is only liable for attempted harm to C
4. DA cannot be liable for harm to C because A had no mens rea at all in relation to C

Which of these can NOT be used to justify a restriction on imports under Article 36 TFEU?

1. AProtection of industrial and commercial property
2. BProtecting the national economy from competition
3. CPublic morality
4. DProtection of human health

In CIA Security (1996), Belgian technical rules not notified to the Commission as required by a directive were held to be:

1. AValid, because directives do not have horizontal direct effect
2. BVoid only in disputes against the Belgian state
3. CValid until the Commission brings infringement proceedings
4. DInapplicable, even in a dispute between private competitors