1.Easy
Which equitable remedy corrects a written contract so it records what the parties actually agreed?
- ARescission
- BQuantum meruit
- CRectification
- DSpecific performance
2.Easy
In English law, "past consideration" is generally:
- ARequired for every contract
- BGood consideration only between family members
- CGood consideration if it was valuable
- DNot good consideration
3.Easy
In England and Wales, a claim for breach of a simple (non-deed) contract must usually be brought within:
- ASix years of the breach
- BOne year of the breach
- CThree months of the breach
- DTwelve years of the breach
4.Medium
Damages for breach of contract are generally meant to:
- APunish the party in breach
- BPut the innocent party in the position as if the contract had been performed
- CReturn both parties only to the position they were in before the contract was made
- DGive the innocent party a profit beyond their loss
5.Medium
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:
- AA contract only for the first delivery
- BNo contract, because nothing was signed
- CA void agreement for lack of certainty
- DA contract accepted by conduct
6.Medium
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:
- AThe misrepresentation becomes a term
- BThe buyer can still rely on the misrepresentation
- CThe buyer loses all remedies by failing to check
- DThe buyer can claim only half the loss
7.Hard
A seller mistakenly offers hare skins at a price per pound instead of per piece. The buyer knew that prices were always quoted per piece. In Hartog v Colin and Shields:
- AThere was no contract, as the buyer knew of the mistake
- BThe court rewrote the price to per piece
- CThere was a binding contract at the stated price
- DThe contract was voidable at the buyer's option
8.Hard
A flat is hired for two days to watch a coronation procession, which is cancelled because the King is ill. The contract does not mention the procession. In Krell v Henry:
- AThe hirer had to pay as the risk was his
- BThe contract was not frustrated, because the flat was still available
- CThe contract was void for common mistake
- DThe contract was frustrated, because the procession was its foundation
Answer key
- 1. C · Rectification
- 2. D · Not good consideration
- 3. A · Six years of the breach
- 4. B · Put the innocent party in the position as if the contract had been performed
- 5. D · A contract accepted by conduct
- 6. B · The buyer can still rely on the misrepresentation
- 7. A · There was no contract, as the buyer knew of the mistake
- 8. D · The contract was frustrated, because the procession was its foundation
Full step-by-step solutions: practise this topic on examproblems.com.