Tort law worksheet with answers

Which English statute lets dependants of a person killed by a tort claim for their loss of financial support?

1. ACompensation Act 2006
2. BLaw Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945
3. COccupiers' Liability Act 1984
4. DFatal Accidents Act 1976

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

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

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

1. APassing off
2. BBattery
3. CNuisance
4. DConversion

In Barnett v Chelsea and Kensington Hospital, why did the claim fail?

1. AThe patient would have died even with proper treatment
2. BThe claim was made too late
3. CThe hospital owed no duty of care to a patient it had not admitted
4. DThe doctor met the standard of care

Under Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board, a doctor must inform a patient about:

1. ANothing, unless the patient asks
2. BMaterial risks of treatment and reasonable alternatives
3. CEvery possible risk, however remote
4. DOnly the risks other doctors would usually mention

Under Dutch law, the general provision for liability for unlawful acts (onrechtmatige daad) is:

1. AArticle 7:17 BW
2. BArticle 3:40 BW
3. CArticle 1 of the Constitution
4. DArticle 6:162 BW

A newspaper publishes that a model is attending Narcotics Anonymous, with details and photographs of her leaving a meeting. In Campbell v MGN, the House of Lords held:

1. AThere was no claim, because the photographs were taken on a public street in London
2. BOnly the fact of her addiction was private
3. CThere was no claim, because she had lied about drug use
4. DPublishing the details and photographs was a misuse of private information

A petrol station kiosk attendant racially abuses a customer, follows him outside and assaults him. In Mohamud v WM Morrison Supermarkets, the employer was:

1. AVicariously liable, as the assault was closely connected to his job of serving customers
2. BNot liable, because the assault took place outside the kiosk and after the conversation ended
3. CNot liable, because violence was not part of his job
4. DLiable only if it had trained him poorly