Introduction to Law: cram pack

Police provide extra officers at a mine during a strike, beyond what their public duty requires, at the owner's request. The owner's promise to pay is:

1. AEnforceable, because doing more than a public duty is consideration
2. BUnenforceable, because police protection can never be consideration for a promise
3. CVoid, because it is contrary to public policy
4. DEnforceable only if approved by Parliament

A council writes that it "may be prepared to sell" a house to a tenant and invites a formal application. The tenant applies, then the council changes its policy. In Gibson v Manchester City Council, the House of Lords held:

1. AThere was no contract, because the letter was not an offer
2. BA contract was formed when the tenant applied
3. CThe council was bound by estoppel to sell
4. DA contract was formed when the council's letter was sent to the tenant

Under Dutch law, the general provision for liability for unlawful acts (onrechtmatige daad) is:

1. AArticle 7:17 BW
2. BArticle 3:40 BW
3. CArticle 1 of the Constitution
4. DArticle 6:162 BW

After drinking together for hours, a man agrees to fly with an obviously very drunk pilot, and the plane crashes. In Morris v Murray, the passenger's claim:

1. AFailed, because he voluntarily accepted the risk
2. BSucceeded, because volenti never applies to passengers
3. CSucceeded, with damages reduced for contributory negligence
4. DFailed, because of illegality

Which ground of judicial review applies when a decision-maker ignores a relevant consideration?

1. AIllegality
2. BProcedural impropriety only
3. CNone, because courts never review considerations
4. DLegitimate expectation only

In the Case of Proclamations (1610), the court held that the King:

1. ACould dismiss judges who disagreed
2. BCould not create new offences by proclamation
3. CCould suspend Acts of Parliament
4. DCould change any law by proclamation

D parks his car on a police officer's foot by accident, then refuses to move it once told. Under Fagan v MPC, this is:

1. AOnly criminal damage to the officer's shoe
2. BA mere omission without any duty to act
3. CNo offence, because the original act was accidental and mens rea arose only afterwards
4. DA battery, because the act was continuing when the mens rea arose

In R v Jordan (1956), the court held the chain of causation was broken because:

1. AThe victim refused a blood transfusion for religious reasons, which was unforeseeable
2. BA second attacker stabbed the victim again in hospital
3. CThe medical treatment was "palpably wrong" and the wound had mainly healed
4. DThe victim had an unusually thin skull

Van Gend en Loos (1963) established that:

1. ADirectives have horizontal direct effect
2. BMember states can leave the EU at will
3. CTreaty provisions bind only the member states and never create rights for individuals before national courts
4. DTreaty provisions can have direct effect and create rights for individuals in national courts

EU citizenship case law (Zambrano) established that a third-country national parent of a child who is an EU citizen may have a right of residence when:

1. AThe parent has lived lawfully in the child's member state for at least five years before applying for residence
2. BThe parent pays a residence fee
3. CRefusal would deprive the child of the genuine enjoyment of the substance of EU citizenship rights
4. DThe child is older than 18