1.Easy
A "voidable" contract is one that:
- AIs a criminal agreement and illegal
- BCan only be ended by both parties agreeing together to cancel it
- CIs valid until the affected party chooses to set it aside
- DNever had any legal effect at all
2.Easy
Under the UK Consumer Rights Act 2015, the short-term right to reject faulty goods generally lasts:
- A6 months
- B2 years
- C30 days
- D7 days
3.Easy
An offeree asks whether the offeror would accept delivery in two parts, without rejecting the original terms. This is:
- AA revocation
- BAn acceptance
- CA counter-offer
- DA request for information
4.Medium
Police provide extra officers at a mine during a strike, beyond what their public duty requires, at the owner's request. The owner's promise to pay is:
- AEnforceable, because doing more than a public duty is consideration
- BUnenforceable, because police protection can never be consideration for a promise
- CEnforceable only if approved by Parliament
- DVoid, because it is contrary to public policy
5.Medium
A sailor is to be paid only on completing a voyage, but dies part of the way. Under the strict rule applied in Cutter v Powell:
- ANothing was recoverable for the part performed
- BThe full wages were payable
- CThe ship owner had to pay compensation
- DA proportion of the wages was payable
6.Medium
A builder makes a swimming pool shallower than agreed. It is still safe and no less valuable, and rebuilding would cost far more than any benefit. In Ruxley Electronics v Forsyth the owner received:
- AA full refund of the contract price
- BNothing, as there was no loss in value
- CA modest sum for loss of amenity
- DThe full cost of rebuilding the pool
7.Hard
Under the EU Unfair Terms Directive, a non-negotiated consumer contract term is unfair if:
- AIt benefits the trader in any way, even where the consumer's rights are not significantly affected
- BContrary to good faith, it causes a significant imbalance to the consumer's detriment
- CThe consumer did not read it
- DIt was written in small font
8.Hard
A husband who has left his wife signs a note promising to transfer the house to her if she pays off the mortgage. She does. In Merritt v Merritt, the promise was:
- AUnenforceable, because she gave no consideration
- BEnforceable, because separated spouses are presumed to intend legal relations
- CUnenforceable, because it was a domestic arrangement between husband and wife
- DEnforceable only because it was made by deed
Answer key
- 1. C · Is valid until the affected party chooses to set it aside
- 2. C · 30 days
- 3. D · A request for information
- 4. A · Enforceable, because doing more than a public duty is consideration
- 5. A · Nothing was recoverable for the part performed
- 6. C · A modest sum for loss of amenity
- 7. B · Contrary to good faith, it causes a significant imbalance to the consumer's detriment
- 8. B · Enforceable, because separated spouses are presumed to intend legal relations
Full step-by-step solutions: practise this topic on examproblems.com.