Tort law worksheet with answers

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

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

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

Under Part I of the UK Consumer Protection Act 1987, liability for a defective product is:

1. AOnly available if there is a contract with the producer of the product
2. BLimited to products bought directly from the producer
3. CFault-based, so the claimant must prove negligence
4. DStrict, so the claimant need not prove the producer was at fault

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. CNot liable, because the boy was a trespasser
4. DLiable, because burns were a foreseeable type of harm

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

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

After an accident in a tunnel, a police inspector negligently orders an officer to ride back against the traffic, and the officer is hit. In Knightley v Johns, the original negligent driver was:

1. ANot liable for the officer's injury, because the inspector's negligence broke the chain
2. BLiable, because rescuers are foreseeable
3. CLiable for all consequences, because the officer's injury was a foreseeable result of the crash
4. DLiable for half, shared with the inspector

A surveyor values a modest house for a mortgage lender, knowing the buyer will rely on it. The report is negligent and contains a disclaimer. In Smith v Eric S Bush, the House of Lords held:

1. AThe surveyor owed a duty to the buyer, and the disclaimer failed the reasonableness test
2. BThe disclaimer excluded all liability to the buyer
3. CThe surveyor owed no duty, because the buyer was not the client who commissioned the report
4. DThe lender alone could sue the surveyor