1Practice problems
1.Contract lawMedium
A seller says the farms are "fully let" but does not mention that the tenants have given notice to leave. This is:
- AMere silence, which is never actionable
- BA misrepresentation by half-truth
- CA mere puff with no legal effect
- DA statement of opinion only
2.Contract lawHard
Under the Vienna Sales Convention (CISG), a reply to an offer that adds non-material terms:
- AHas no legal effect
- BIs an acceptance, unless the offeror objects without undue delay
- CCreates a contract only after a court confirms that the added terms are non-material
- DIs always a rejection
3.Tort lawMedium
A man bangs trays and shouts every time his neighbour, a music teacher, gives lessons, purely to annoy her. In Christie v Davey, the court held:
- AOnly the police could deal with the noise
- BMusic lessons are themselves a nuisance
- CHis malice made the noise an unreasonable use of land and a nuisance
- DIntention is irrelevant in nuisance, so his motive could not affect the claim
4.Tort lawHard
In Fairchild v Glenhaven Funeral Services, the court allowed claims against employers even though the "but for" test could not be met because:
- AThe House of Lords abolished causation
- BThe employers admitted intention
- CSeveral employers had exposed the victim to asbestos and it was impossible to say which caused the mesothelioma
- DThe victims had signed contracts with all the employers, which expressly allocated liability for asbestos disease
5.Constitutional lawMedium
In Dudgeon v UK, the European Court of Human Rights held that criminalising consensual homosexual acts between adult men in Northern Ireland:
- AViolated the right to respect for private life under Article 8
- BViolated only the right to marry
- CWas outside the scope of the Convention
- DWas justified under Article 8(2) as necessary to protect public morals
6.Constitutional lawHard
The "margin of appreciation" doctrine of the European Court of Human Rights means that:
- AThe Court never reviews national decisions
- BStates have some discretion in how they protect rights, especially on sensitive moral issues
- CStates may disregard Strasbourg judgments whenever their own parliament disagrees with the outcome
- DEvery state must apply identical rules
7.Criminal lawMedium
Causation in criminal law requires that the defendant's act was:
- AThe only cause of the result
- BMorally wrong
- CA factual and legal cause of the result
- DIntended to cause the result in every case
8.Criminal lawHard
In R v Roberts (1971), a woman jumped from a moving car to escape a sexual assault and was injured. The court held the defendant liable unless her reaction was:
- ASo "daft" or unexpected that no reasonable person could have foreseen it
- BMore dangerous than staying in the car
- CCaused by her own panic and fear
- DTaken without first asking the defendant to stop the car and let her out
9.EU lawMedium
Internationale Handelsgesellschaft (1970) held that the validity of a Community measure:
- ARequires approval by a national referendum
- BCannot be affected by claims that it breaches national constitutional rights
- CCan be reviewed by any national court that doubts it
- DDepends on its compatibility with the fundamental rights in each national constitution
10.EU lawHard
Keck and Mithouard (1993) held that national rules on "selling arrangements" fall outside Article 34 TFEU if they:
- AConcern the composition, labelling or packaging of products, even if they apply equally to all traders in the national territory
- BApply to all traders in the national territory and affect domestic and imported products equally in law and fact
- CAre adopted by local authorities
- DDiscriminate against imported products
2Solutions
1.Contract law
Answer: B · A misrepresentation by half-truth
Why this is the answer
Jurisdiction: law of England and Wales. A statement that is literally true but misleading because of what it leaves out can be a misrepresentation.
B · A misrepresentation by half-truth
2.Contract law
Answer: B · Is an acceptance, unless the offeror objects without undue delay
Why this is the answer
Jurisdiction: international law. Under Article 19 CISG, additions that do not materially alter the offer make the reply an acceptance on the modified terms unless the offeror promptly objects.
B · Is an acceptance, unless the offeror objects without undue delay
3.Tort law
Answer: C · His malice made the noise an unreasonable use of land and a nuisance
Why this is the answer
Jurisdiction: law of England and Wales. Deliberate, spiteful conduct can turn what might otherwise be acceptable noise into a nuisance. Hollywood Silver Fox Farm v Emmett is a similar case.
C · His malice made the noise an unreasonable use of land and a nuisance
4.Tort law
Answer: C · Several employers had exposed the victim to asbestos and it was impossible to say which caused the mesothelioma
Why this is the answer
Jurisdiction: law of England and Wales. Where each employer materially increased the risk of mesothelioma and science could not identify the cause, causation was established by material contribution to risk.
C · Several employers had exposed the victim to asbestos and it was impossible to say which caused the mesothelioma
5.Constitutional law
Answer: A · Violated the right to respect for private life under Article 8
Why this is the answer
Jurisdiction: European Convention on Human Rights. The Court held that criminalising private consensual sexual acts was not necessary in a democratic society and breached Article 8.
A · Violated the right to respect for private life under Article 8
6.Constitutional law
Answer: B · States have some discretion in how they protect rights, especially on sensitive moral issues
Why this is the answer
Jurisdiction: European Convention on Human Rights. The Court gives national authorities latitude because they are better placed to assess local needs, narrowing it where a European consensus exists or core rights are at stake.
B · States have some discretion in how they protect rights, especially on sensitive moral issues
7.Criminal law
Answer: C · A factual and legal cause of the result
Why this is the answer
Jurisdiction: law of England and Wales. The act must be a "but for" cause and a more than minimal, operating cause; intervening acts may break the chain.
C · A factual and legal cause of the result
8.Criminal law
Answer: A · So "daft" or unexpected that no reasonable person could have foreseen it
Why this is the answer
Jurisdiction: law of England and Wales. A victim's reaction does not break the chain if it was within the range of responses reasonably foreseeable; only a daft reaction would.
A · So "daft" or unexpected that no reasonable person could have foreseen it
9.EU law
Answer: B · Cannot be affected by claims that it breaches national constitutional rights
Why this is the answer
Jurisdiction: EU law. The Court held that EU law prevails even over national constitutional rights, but that respect for fundamental rights forms part of the general principles of EU law that it protects.
B · Cannot be affected by claims that it breaches national constitutional rights
10.EU law
Answer: B · Apply to all traders in the national territory and affect domestic and imported products equally in law and fact
Why this is the answer
Jurisdiction: EU law. Keck distinguished product requirements (within Article 34) from non-discriminatory selling arrangements (outside it), limiting the broad Dassonville formula.
B · Apply to all traders in the national territory and affect domestic and imported products equally in law and fact