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

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

1. ARead by the claimant personally
2. BPublished to at least one third party
3. CRepeated by at least two people
4. DPublished in print or on television

Which three elements must a claimant usually prove in negligence?

1. AFault, punishment and apology
2. BContract, breach and loss
3. CIntention, motive and harm
4. DDuty of care, breach of that duty and damage caused by the breach

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

A premature baby goes blind. Excess oxygen negligently given was only one of five possible causes. In Wilsher v Essex AHA, the claim:

1. ASucceeded, with damages reduced by four fifths
2. BSucceeded, because the negligence materially increased the risk of the blindness
3. CFailed, because the claimant could not prove the negligence caused the blindness
4. DFailed, because no duty was owed to a baby

An employer does not give goggles to a worker already blind in one eye, who loses his good eye at work. Under Paris v Stepney BC, the employer was:

1. ANot negligent, because the risk of an accident was the same for all workers
2. BStrictly liable for all eye injuries
3. CNegligent, because the possible harm to this worker was very serious
4. DNot negligent, because goggles were not normally provided

In Fairchild v Glenhaven Funeral Services, the court allowed claims against employers even though the "but for" test could not be met because:

1. AThe victims had signed contracts with all the employers, which expressly allocated liability for asbestos disease
2. BThe employers admitted intention
3. CThe House of Lords abolished causation
4. DSeveral employers had exposed the victim to asbestos and it was impossible to say which caused the mesothelioma

Two children see their father collapse and die from a heart attack, long after a hospital negligently failed to diagnose his heart disease. In Paul v Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust (2024), the Supreme Court held that:

1. AThe hospital owed them no duty as secondary victims
2. BThey were primary victims of the hospital's negligence
3. CThey could recover because they witnessed the death
4. DOnly their mother could claim for their shock