Tort law worksheet with answers

How do English courts usually treat a person injured while rescuing someone endangered by the defendant's negligence?

1. AThey cannot claim, because they volunteered
2. BThey can claim only if they are professional rescuers, such as firefighters
3. CThey can usually claim, because rescue is foreseeable
4. DThey can claim only half their damages

Wrongfully dealing with another person's goods in a way that denies their rights, such as selling them, is the tort of:

1. ABattery
2. BPassing off
3. CNuisance
4. DConversion

In English law, is there a general duty to rescue a stranger in danger?

1. AYes, but only for trained professionals
2. BNo, there is generally no liability for a pure omission
3. CYes, everyone must try to rescue anyone in danger
4. DNo, unless the stranger asks for help

In Bolitho v City and Hackney HA, the House of Lords added to the Bolam test that the professional opinion relied on must:

1. ABe capable of withstanding logical analysis
2. BBe held by most doctors in the country
3. CBe written in a medical textbook
4. DBe accepted by the patient

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. ALiable only for half of the damage
2. BNot liable, because the boy was a trespasser
3. CNot liable, because the explosion was unforeseeable
4. DLiable, because burns were a foreseeable type of harm

A doctor builds a consulting room next to a confectioner whose noisy machines had operated for years without complaint. Can the confectioner defend a nuisance claim by saying the doctor "came to the nuisance"?

1. ANo, because doctors have special protection
2. BYes, because the machines were used first
3. CYes, the doctor accepted the noise by building there
4. DNo, coming to the nuisance is not a defence

After Barker v Corus held that liability under the Fairchild exception was proportionate to each defendant's share of the risk, Parliament responded for mesothelioma cases by:

1. ACreating a state compensation fund to replace tort claims against employers and their insurers entirely
2. BMaking each responsible person liable for the whole damage, under the Compensation Act 2006
3. CAbolishing claims for asbestos disease
4. DRequiring proof of "but for" causation in all cases

Residents complain of noise from a motor sports stadium that had been used for years and had planning permission. In Coventry v Lawrence, the Supreme Court held that:

1. APlanning permission was not in itself a defence, and damages instead of an injunction should be considered more flexibly
2. BCourts must always grant an injunction where nuisance is proved
3. CComing to the nuisance was a complete defence
4. DPlanning permission was a complete defence to the nuisance claim