Tort law worksheet with answers

The tort of battery is:

1. ACausing another person to reasonably fear that unlawful force is about to be used
2. BCarelessly injuring another person on the road
3. CMaking a false statement that harms someone's reputation
4. DThe intentional and direct application of unlawful force to another person

In England and Wales, a negligence claim for personal injury must usually be started within:

1. ATwelve years of the injury
2. BOne year of the injury
3. CSix years of the injury
4. DThree years of the injury or the date of knowledge

In negligence, the standard of care is usually that of:

1. AThe claimant's expectations
2. BThe reasonable person in the defendant's position
3. CA perfect expert in every case
4. DThe defendant's own personal best

The Wagon Mound case concerns which issue?

1. ADirectness: a defendant is liable for all direct consequences of the breach
2. BDuty of care to unborn children
3. CStrict liability for animals
4. DRemoteness: only reasonably foreseeable types of damage are recoverable

An occupier hires a reputable lift company to maintain a lift. The company's negligence causes an accident. Under Haseldine v Daw, the occupier is:

1. ALiable only if the lift is new
2. BLiable for any defect on its premises
3. CLiable, because maintenance is non-delegable
4. DNot liable, if it reasonably chose a competent contractor

Workmen leave an open manhole with paraffin lamps. A boy knocks a lamp in, causing an unexpected explosion and burns. In Hughes v Lord Advocate, the defendants were:

1. ANot liable, because the explosion was unforeseeable
2. BLiable only for half of the damage
3. CLiable, because burns were a foreseeable type of harm
4. DNot liable, because the boy was a trespasser

In Hedley Byrne v Heller, liability for negligent misstatement arose because:

1. AThe defendant intended to deceive
2. BThe statement caused physical injury
3. CThere was a contract between the parties under which the bank was paid a fee for the reference it gave
4. DThere was a special relationship in which the claimant reasonably relied on advice given with skill

A bank requires job applicants to have medical examinations by a self-employed doctor, who abuses some of them. In Barclays Bank v Various Claimants (2020), the Supreme Court held the bank:

1. AStrictly liable for any harm to applicants
2. BVicariously liable, as the relationship was akin to employment and the bank benefited from his work
3. CVicariously liable, because it chose the doctor
4. DNot vicariously liable, as the doctor was an independent contractor running his own business