Tort law worksheet with answers

Under section 1 of the Defamation Act 2013, a statement is not defamatory unless:

1. AThe claimant has lost money because of it
2. BIt has caused or is likely to cause serious harm to the claimant's reputation
3. CIt was published in a newspaper or online
4. DThe defendant intended to harm the claimant or was reckless as to whether it would

In a personal injury claim, "special damages" usually cover:

1. ASpecific financial losses up to trial, such as lost earnings and medical costs
2. BA nominal sum to mark that a right was infringed
3. CExtra damages to punish the defendant
4. DCompensation for pain, suffering and loss of amenity up to the date of the trial

The tort of assault is:

1. ACausing someone to reasonably expect immediate unlawful force
2. BHolding someone in a room against their will
3. CInsulting someone in front of others
4. DActually applying force to someone directly and without their consent

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

A driver is in a minor collision, suffers no physical injury, but his chronic fatigue illness becomes permanent. In Page v Smith, he could recover because:

1. AHe was a primary victim and personal injury of some kind was foreseeable
2. BThe defendant intended to injure him
3. CHe had a close tie of love with the other driver
4. DPsychiatric injury is always recoverable after any road accident, however minor

A boarding-house warden employed by a school abuses the boys in his care. In Lister v Hesley Hall, the employer was:

1. ANot liable, because abuse is never within the course of the warden's employment
2. BVicariously liable, because the abuse was closely connected with his duties
3. CNot liable, because the warden acted for himself
4. DLiable only for its own negligent hiring

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 could recover because they witnessed the death
3. CThey were primary victims of the hospital's negligence
4. DOnly their mother could claim for their shock

A "novus actus interveniens" can:

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