Tort law worksheet with answers

For a defamation claim, the statement must be defamatory, refer to the claimant, and be:

1. ARepeated by at least two people
2. BPublished to at least one third party
3. CPublished in print or on television
4. DRead by the claimant personally

In English law, publishing private information without justification is mainly dealt with by the tort of:

1. AMalicious falsehood
2. BTrespass to land
3. CDefamation
4. DMisuse of private information

The defence of necessity in tort may justify an act when:

1. AIt was reasonably necessary to prevent greater harm to people or property
2. BThe defendant was in a hurry
3. CThe act was necessary to protect the defendant's business profits from foreseeable loss
4. DThe claimant was rude to the defendant

A council leaves an abandoned boat on its land. Two boys jack it up to repair it, and it falls and injures one. In Jolley v Sutton LBC, the council was:

1. ANot liable, because repairs are not play
2. BLiable only to the boy who used the jack
3. CLiable, because the broad type of accident was foreseeable
4. DNot liable, because the boys' exact actions were unforeseeable

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, because maintenance is non-delegable
3. CLiable for any defect on its premises
4. DNot liable, if it reasonably chose a competent contractor

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

A petrol station kiosk attendant racially abuses a customer, follows him outside and assaults him. In Mohamud v WM Morrison Supermarkets, the employer was:

1. ALiable only if it had trained him poorly
2. BVicariously liable, as the assault was closely connected to his job of serving customers
3. CNot liable, because violence was not part of his job
4. DNot liable, because the assault took place outside the kiosk and after the conversation ended

After drinking together for hours, a man agrees to fly with an obviously very drunk pilot, and the plane crashes. In Morris v Murray, the passenger's claim:

1. AFailed, because of illegality
2. BSucceeded, with damages reduced for contributory negligence
3. CFailed, because he voluntarily accepted the risk
4. DSucceeded, because volenti never applies to passengers