Introduction to Law: cram pack

A former wife sues for maintenance her ex-husband promised, relying only on promissory estoppel because she gave no consideration. In Combe v Combe:

1. AShe failed, because promissory estoppel is a shield, not a sword
2. BShe succeeded, because the promise was made in writing
3. CShe succeeded, because she relied on the promise
4. DShe failed, because family agreements are never legally binding on either party

A client repudiates an advertising contract the same day it is made. The agency ignores this, displays the adverts for the full period and sues for the price. In White and Carter v McGregor:

1. AThe agency could recover the full price
2. BThe agency had to obtain a court order first
3. CThe agency could only claim damages after mitigating
4. DThe agency could recover nothing

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

1. ANothing, unless the patient asks
2. BEvery possible risk, however remote
3. COnly the risks other doctors would usually mention
4. DMaterial risks of treatment and reasonable alternatives

After a workplace injury weakens his leg, a man walks down steep stairs with no handrail while carrying a child, his leg gives way, and he jumps and breaks his ankle. In McKew v Holland and Hannen and Cubitts:

1. AThe employer was liable for the ankle injury as a foreseeable result
2. BHis unreasonable conduct broke the chain of causation
3. CThe stairs' owner was solely liable
4. DThe employer was liable for half of the ankle injury

In Dudgeon v UK, the European Court of Human Rights held that criminalising consensual homosexual acts between adult men in Northern Ireland:

1. AWas outside the scope of the Convention
2. BWas justified under Article 8(2) as necessary to protect public morals
3. CViolated only the right to marry
4. DViolated the right to respect for private life under Article 8

In Miller II (2019), the UK Supreme Court found the prorogation of Parliament unlawful because:

1. AIt frustrated Parliament's constitutional functions without reasonable justification
2. BThe Queen refused to approve it
3. CIt was decided by a referendum
4. DIt violated Article 3 of Protocol 1 ECHR by interfering with the right to free elections

During a burglary, D has handed a knife to an accomplice. When someone arrives, D says "come on, let's go" and climbs out; the accomplice stabs the person. Following R v Becerra, D's withdrawal is:

1. ANot effective, because withdrawal must be timely and unequivocal and may need more than words once violence is imminent
2. BEffective, because any words of withdrawal are always enough
3. CEffective, because D left before the crime was completed
4. DIrrelevant, because once an accessory has supplied a weapon, no later act of withdrawal can ever relieve them of liability

In Airedale NHS Trust v Bland (1993), the House of Lords held that withdrawing life-sustaining treatment from a patient in a persistent vegetative state:

1. AWas a positive act of killing, amounting to murder
2. BWas lawful because the patient had made an advance decision
3. CWas an omission that was lawful because continued treatment was no longer in the patient's best interests
4. DWas lawful only because the patient's family had given consent, which is required for any such withdrawal

According to Gebhard (1995), what mainly distinguishes establishment from the provision of services?

1. AServices are provided only through a permanent office or branch in the host member state
2. BEstablishment always requires forming a company
3. CServices can only be provided by employees
4. DEstablishment involves activity on a stable and continuous basis in the host state

In Köbler (2003), the Court of Justice held that state liability can arise from:

1. ADecisions of the Court of Justice itself
2. BA manifest infringement of EU law by a national court of last instance
3. CAny error of interpretation made by a national court of first instance, however minor
4. DOnly failures of the national legislature