Introduction to Law: cram pack

In Hadley v Baxendale, damages are recoverable for losses that:

1. AWere caused in any factual sense by the breach, however unusual and unforeseeable they were
2. BThe claimant suffered only after the trial
3. CWere caused by a third party
4. DArise naturally from the breach or were in the reasonable contemplation of both parties

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

Heat from a neighbour's ordinary activity damages specially sensitive paper stored by the claimant, but would not harm ordinary paper. Under Robinson v Kilvert, the claim:

1. ASucceeds, because the paper was valuable
2. BSucceeds, because any physical damage to goods is an actionable nuisance
3. CFails, because heat cannot be a nuisance
4. DFails, because nuisance does not protect abnormally sensitive uses

For a public authority, a negligence claim about how it exercised a statutory power often fails because:

1. AStatutory powers automatically create a private law duty to use them carefully for each citizen
2. BCourts are reluctant to impose duties for failing to confer benefits or for policy decisions
3. CAuthorities are always immune from all claims
4. DThe authority must be sued in a criminal court

Under section 2 of the UK Human Rights Act 1998, UK courts must, when deciding Convention rights questions:

1. AFollow every relevant Strasbourg judgment strictly, as binding precedent
2. BIgnore Strasbourg case law
3. CRefer all questions to Strasbourg
4. DTake into account judgments of the European Court of Human Rights

A woman with a terminal illness asks for a guarantee that her husband will not be prosecuted for helping her die. In Pretty v UK, the European Court of Human Rights held that Article 2:

1. ADoes not include a right to die
2. BRequires an immunity for her husband
3. CRequires states to allow assisted suicide
4. DWas not engaged by her case at all

Two adult friends agree to a fist fight in the street, and one breaks the other's nose. Following A-G's Reference (No 6 of 1980), consent is:

1. ARelevant only to the sentence and never to guilt
2. BNo defence, because a street fight causing actual bodily harm is not in the public interest
3. CA defence only if the fight was planned in advance
4. DA full defence, because both adults freely agreed to the fight and accepted the risk of injury

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:

1. AMore dangerous than staying in the car
2. BCaused by her own panic and fear
3. CTaken without first asking the defendant to stop the car and let her out
4. DSo "daft" or unexpected that no reasonable person could have foreseen it

In Ratti (1979), the Court held that an individual could NOT rely on a directive against the state:

1. ABefore the transposition deadline had expired
2. BIf the member state had failed to transpose it
3. CAfter the transposition deadline had expired
4. DIf the directive was clear and unconditional

Keck and Mithouard (1993) held that national rules on "selling arrangements" fall outside Article 34 TFEU if they:

1. ADiscriminate against imported products
2. BConcern the composition, labelling or packaging of products, even if they apply equally to all traders in the national territory
3. CAre adopted by local authorities
4. DApply to all traders in the national territory and affect domestic and imported products equally in law and fact