Tort law worksheet with answers

Under the Occupiers' Liability Act 1957, an occupier owes lawful visitors:

1. AStrict liability for any injury on the premises
2. BThe common duty of care
3. CNo duty unless there is a contract
4. DA duty only to warn of hidden dangers

Which defence applies when the claimant voluntarily accepted the risk of harm?

1. ANecessity
2. BContributory negligence
3. CVolenti non fit injuria (consent)
4. DSelf-defence

Defamation protects a person's:

1. AReputation
2. BPhysical safety
3. CProperty
4. DPrivacy of medical records only

A firefighter is injured by a heavy jack in an unsuitable lorry rushed to rescue a woman trapped under a vehicle. Under Watt v Hertfordshire CC, the fire authority was:

1. AStrictly liable for injuries to employees
2. BNegligent, because firefighters must never take risks
3. CNegligent, because it used an unsuitable vehicle
4. DNot negligent, because saving life justified the risk

Two 15-year-old girls fence with plastic rulers and one is injured in the eye. Under Mullin v Richards, the defendant's conduct is judged by the standard of:

1. AA reasonable teacher
2. BA reasonable adult
3. CThe defendant's own understanding
4. DA reasonable 15-year-old

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, because burns were a foreseeable type of harm
3. CLiable only for half of the damage
4. DNot liable, because the boy was a trespasser

A "novus actus interveniens" can:

1. ATurn a civil claim into a criminal one when the intervening act is an offence
2. BCreate a new duty of care
3. CBreak the chain of causation between the defendant's breach and the harm
4. DIncrease the damages owed

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