Contract law worksheet with answers

In English law, agreements between spouses living together in harmony are presumed to be:

1. ABinding only if witnessed
2. BBinding only for one year
3. CAlways legally binding
4. DNot intended to be legally binding

Under the contra proferentem rule, an ambiguous term is interpreted:

1. AIn favour of the stronger party
2. BAgainst the party who relies on it
3. CAs if it were not part of the contract
4. DIn favour of the party who drafted it

A vague sales claim such as "the best coffee in the world" is usually treated as:

1. AA condition of the contract
2. BA fraudulent misrepresentation
3. CAn implied warranty of quality
4. DA mere puff with no legal effect

A supplier receives a draft agreement, never signs or returns it, but both sides trade on its terms for years. A court is likely to find:

1. ANo contract, because nothing was signed
2. BA void agreement for lack of certainty
3. CA contract only for the first delivery
4. DA contract accepted by conduct

A buyer is told false figures about a business and is offered documents that would reveal the truth, but does not read them. Under Redgrave v Hurd:

1. AThe buyer can claim only half the loss
2. BThe buyer loses all remedies by failing to check
3. CThe buyer can still rely on the misrepresentation
4. DThe misrepresentation becomes a term

A hotel guest sees an exclusion notice in her room only after booking and paying at reception. Under Olley v Marlborough Court Hotel, the notice is:

1. ANot part of the contract, because it came after formation
2. BBinding from the second night onwards
3. CPart of the contract, because hotels may exclude liability
4. DPart of the contract, because she stayed in the room

A carrier, knowing a small company depends on its deliveries to supply a major customer, refuses to continue unless paid a higher minimum price. The company agrees as it has no alternative. In Atlas Express v Kafco:

1. AThe new agreement was not binding, due to economic duress
2. BThe new agreement was binding as a free variation
3. CThe new agreement was binding, as the carrier's continued performance was a practical benefit
4. DThe carrier committed a crime of extortion

In Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co, the court held that the advertisement was:

1. AA contract only with the newspaper
2. BA unilateral offer that could be accepted by performing the conditions
3. CA mere advertising puff with no legal effect, since no one could take it seriously
4. DAn invitation to treat