A) The probability of the injury occurring
B) The cost of taking precautions
C) The social value of the activity
D) The seriousness of the injury
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) LB < P
B) BP > P
C) B < LP
D) B > LP
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) QBD
B) UKSC
C) Weetabix Ltd
D) Hertfordshire County Council
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) QBD
B) UKSC
C) Weetabix Ltd
D) Hertfordshire County Council
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) The Bolam test
B) The doctrine of res ipsa loquitur (the thing speaks for itself)
C) The Learned Hand test
D) The standard of care
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) QBD
B) UKSC
C) Weetabix Ltd
D) Hertfordshire County Council
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) To prevent the injustice that might follow should the standard of care be varied according to someone's knowledge of another's skill
B) To punished the defendant for failing to pay attention
C) To ensure that the claimant could be adequately compensated by the defendant's motor insurance
D) To avoid the confusion that may follow if the standard of care varied according to the claimant's experience or expertise
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) Denning LJ in Roe v Ministry of Health
B) Denning MR in Nettleship v Weston
C) McNair J in Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee
D) Lord Oaskey in Bolton v Stone
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) Roger is contributory negligent and so he (Neil) is not liable at all
B) He (Neil) had done his inexperienced best to avoid hitting anyone
C) The standard of care is lower in respect of sporting injuries and as such he (Neil) had not fallen below the standard of care expected of him.
D) He (Neil) had acted as an ordinary child of 15 and as such he had not fallen below the standard of care expected of him.
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) 2006
B) 2005
C) 1996
D) 1995
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) QBD
B) UKSC
C) Weetabix Ltd
D) Hertfordshire County Council
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) have acted as a reasonable person would have done.
B) have acted in accordance with a practice accepted as proper by a responsible body of people skilled in that particular area, even if that practice was logically insupportable.
C) have acted in accordance with a practice accepted as proper by a responsible body of people skilled in that particular area and the practice is logically supportable.
D) have acted to the best of their ability.
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) What standard of care did the circumstances require?
B) What behaviour was reasonable in the situation at hand?
C) What would a reasonable man in the position of the defendant have done in the circumstances?
D) What could this particular defendant have done?
Correct Answer
verified
Showing 1 - 13 of 13
Related Exams