Introduction to Law: cram pack

A decorator finishes the work but with minor defects that are cheap to fix. Under Hoenig v Isaacs, the decorator is entitled to:

1. AThe full price with no deduction
2. BNothing, because performance was not exact
3. CThe price less the cost of putting the defects right
4. DOnly payment for the materials used

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

Under Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board, a doctor must inform a patient about:

1. AOnly the risks other doctors would usually mention
2. BNothing, unless the patient asks
3. CMaterial risks of treatment and reasonable alternatives
4. DEvery possible risk, however remote

The defence of "illegality" (ex turpi causa) in tort means that:

1. AThe defendant cannot be sued if the defendant's own conduct towards the claimant was itself a criminal offence
2. BOnly the state can bring the claim
3. CA claimant may be barred from recovering where the claim arises from their own serious illegal conduct
4. DEvery claimant with a criminal record loses

A minister refuses to refer a complaint to a committee because the result might embarrass the government. In Padfield v Minister of Agriculture, the House of Lords held:

1. AThe refusal was lawful, since the Act imposed no duty to give reasons
2. BThe minister had unlimited discretion
3. COnly Parliament could question the minister
4. DThe refusal was unlawful, as it frustrated the purpose of the Act

A prison policy requires prisoners to be absent while officers search their cells, including their legal correspondence. In R (Daly) v Home Secretary (2001), the House of Lords held:

1. AThe policy was unlawful only for unconvicted prisoners held on remand awaiting trial
2. BThe policy was lawful, as prisons need security
3. CThe policy was lawful, as prisoners have no privacy
4. DThe blanket policy unlawfully interfered with legal professional privilege

D, who honestly but wrongly believes V is attacking a stranger, punches V. Following R v Williams (Gladstone), D:

1. AIs judged on the facts as D honestly believed them to be
2. BIs liable, because the mistaken belief was not based on reasonable grounds
3. CIs liable, because the mistake was about the facts
4. DMust prove the belief on the balance of probabilities

Under the loss of control defence (Coroners and Justice Act 2009), the defence is NOT available if:

1. AThe defendant acted in a considered desire for revenge
2. BThe loss of control was not sudden
3. CThe victim was a family member
4. DThe defendant had been drinking that day

A member state grants a subsidy to a company without notifying the Commission. Under the state aid rules, the state:

1. AHas acted lawfully if the subsidy was small in its view
2. BMust pay a fine to every competitor
3. CMust obtain approval from the European Parliament afterwards to legalise the aid
4. DBreached the standstill obligation and may be required to recover the aid

In Unión de Pequeños Agricultores (UPA, 2002), the Court of Justice held that the Plaumann test:

1. AShould be relaxed, as the Advocate General proposed, to a "substantial adverse effect" test wherever no national remedy exists
2. BCould not be relaxed by the Court, as effective remedies are the responsibility of national systems and treaty amendment
3. CWas incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights
4. DApplies only to regulations, not to decisions