1.Easy
When two tortfeasors cause the same indivisible damage, the claimant can usually:
- ASue only the one who acted first
- BRecover the full damages from either of them
- CSue only if both are joined in one claim
- DRecover only half from each of them
2.Easy
Under the Occupiers' Liability Act 1957, an occupier owes lawful visitors:
- AA duty only to warn of hidden dangers
- BNo duty unless there is a contract
- CStrict liability for any injury on the premises
- DThe common duty of care
3.Easy
Statements made by MPs during debates in the UK Parliament are protected in defamation by:
- AThe public interest defence
- BQualified privilege
- CThe defence of honest opinion
- DAbsolute privilege
4.Medium
The Caparo test for a new duty of care requires:
- AProof of criminal conduct
- BIntention, motive and damage
- CA contract between the parties, a breach of its terms and loss flowing directly from the breach
- DForeseeability of harm, proximity and that it is fair, just and reasonable to impose a duty
5.Medium
A boarding-house warden employed by a school abuses the boys in his care. In Lister v Hesley Hall, the employer was:
- ANot liable, because abuse is never within the course of the warden's employment
- BLiable only for its own negligent hiring
- CVicariously liable, because the abuse was closely connected with his duties
- DNot liable, because the warden acted for himself
6.Medium
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:
- ALiable for any defect on its premises
- BLiable only if the lift is new
- CLiable, because maintenance is non-delegable
- DNot liable, if it reasonably chose a competent contractor
7.Hard
A "novus actus interveniens" can:
- AIncrease the damages owed
- BTurn a civil claim into a criminal one when the intervening act is an offence
- CCreate a new duty of care
- DBreak the chain of causation between the defendant's breach and the harm
8.Hard
Under the EU Product Liability Directive, the "development risks" defence allows a producer to escape liability if:
- AThe product was sold at a low price
- BThe consumer did not read the instructions
- CThe state of scientific and technical knowledge when the product was circulated did not allow the defect to be discovered
- DThe producer was not negligent in manufacturing
Answer key
- 1. B · Recover the full damages from either of them
- 2. D · The common duty of care
- 3. D · Absolute privilege
- 4. D · Foreseeability of harm, proximity and that it is fair, just and reasonable to impose a duty
- 5. C · Vicariously liable, because the abuse was closely connected with his duties
- 6. D · Not liable, if it reasonably chose a competent contractor
- 7. D · Break the chain of causation between the defendant's breach and the harm
- 8. C · The state of scientific and technical knowledge when the product was circulated did not allow the defect to be discovered
Full step-by-step solutions: practise this topic on examproblems.com.