THE CHARTERED INSTITUTE OF LEGAL EXECUTIVES UNIT 13 LAW OF TORT *

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "THE CHARTERED INSTITUTE OF LEGAL EXECUTIVES UNIT 13 LAW OF TORT *"

Owen Hamilton
5 years ago
Views:

1 11 June 2014 Level 6 LAW OF TORT Subject Code L6-13 THE CHARTERED INSTITUTE OF LEGAL EXECUTIVES UNIT 13 LAW OF TORT * Time allowed: 3 hours plus 15 minutes reading time Instructions to Candidates You have FIFTEEN minutes to read through this question paper before the start of the examination. It is strongly recommended that you use the reading time to read the question paper fully. However, you may make notes on the question paper or in your answer booklet during this time, if you wish. All questions carry 25 marks. Answer FOUR only of the following EIGHT questions. The question paper is divided into TWO sections. You MUST answer at least ONE question from Section A and at least ONE question from Section B. Write in full sentences a yes or no answer will earn no marks. Candidates may use in the examination their own unmarked copy of the designated statute book: Blackstone s Statutes on Contract, Tort and Restitution , 24 th edition, Francis Rose, Oxford University Press Candidates must comply with the CILEx Examination Regulations. Full reasoning must be shown in answers. Statutory authorities, decided cases and examples should be used where appropriate. Information for Candidates The mark allocation for each question and part question is given and you are advised to take this into account in planning your work. Write in blue or black ink or ballpoint pen. Attention should be paid to clear, neat handwriting and tidy alterations. Complete all rough work in your answer booklet. Cross through any work you do not want marked. Do not turn over this page until instructed by the Invigilator. * This unit is a component of the following CILEx qualifications: LEVEL 6 CERTIFICATE IN LAW, LEVEL 6 PROFESSIONAL HIGHER DIPLOMA IN LAW AND PRACTICE and the LEVEL 6 DIPLOMA IN LEGAL PRACTICE Page 1 of 8

2 SECTION A (Answer at least one question from this section) 1. (a) Analyse the role of duty of care in the tort of negligence. (7 marks) (b) Critically analyse the development of duty of care in the tort of negligence. (18 marks) (Total: 25 marks) 2. Critically evaluate the application of the objective standard of care in negligence. 3. (a) Evaluate the factors taken into account in balancing the competing rights and interests of the claimant and defendant in a claim for private nuisance. (13 marks) (b) Analyse the requirements for liability under the rule in Rylands v Fletcher. (12 marks) (Total: 25 marks) 4. Critically analyse the extent to which the defences in defamation effectively protect reputation and promote free speech. Page 2 of 8

3 SECTION B (Answer at least one question from this section) Question 1 Alice, an elderly woman, was walking back to her parked car one afternoon. She noticed a young man trying to open the door of what she thought was her car. Alice began to shake her fist and called out Thief! Get away from my car. It transpired that Alice was mistaken because the man, Bruno, was opening the door of his own car, which was the same model and colour as Alice s. Bruno was furious at being called a thief. When Alice reached the area where the cars were parked Bruno struck her a savage blow which knocked her to the ground. Bruno was subsequently shopping in Tradex, a local department store. He noticed a number of small electrical goods for sale at greatly reduced prices, so he decided to buy an electric kettle. The peel-off price label on the item showed the price of the kettle to be 20. Bruno purchased the kettle for 20 but, as he was leaving the store, the security man at the exit accused him of switching the labels. He claimed that Bruno had replaced the original 28 price label on the kettle with the label showing 20 from a toaster. Tradex phoned the police and Bruno was kept in the manager s office until the police arrived an hour later. The room in which Bruno was held was unlocked but the security guard remained outside as they waited for the police to arrive. Bruno was prosecuted for theft in the magistrates court but found not guilty of the offence and he now wishes to sue Tradex for false imprisonment. Advise Bruno. Page 3 of 8 Turn over

4 Question 2 At a beer festival, Olaf and Harold consumed large quantities of alcohol. Afterwards Olaf, who was very drunk, drove his car recklessly, zooming in and out of the town traffic. Harold encouraged Olaf in this reckless behaviour. Harold and Olaf unlawfully purchased a quantity of cannabis and drove to a nightclub. On the way their car crashed into a mini-bus full of students. The crash was due to Olaf s dangerous driving. The driver of the mini-bus had instructed all the passengers to ensure their seat belts were securely fastened before they set off. However, during the journey, Charles, one of the teachers, had unfastened his seat belt because of a seat belt phobia. Charles was severely injured in the collision and evidence shows that if he had been wearing his seat belt his injuries would have been minor. Nabila, another teacher, was uninjured in the accident and remained seated until the paramedics arrived. She told the paramedics that she wished to leave the mini-bus to get some fresh air. The paramedics explained to Nabila that they needed to attend to the seriously injured passengers first but that they would return to help her as soon as possible. They warned Nabila that for her own safety she must not leave the mini-bus until they returned. Against this advice, Nabila attempted to climb out of the mini-bus. Because the passenger door was unusable due to the collision, she used the rear door, which had a very high step down to the ground. As she was stepping down she fell and suffered a broken hip. Harold suffered spinal injuries in the crash and he is planning to sue Olaf (or his insurers) in negligence for the injuries he has suffered in the accident. Advise Charles, Nabila and Harold of any claims they may have and any defences they may be met with. Page 4 of 8

5 Question 3 (a) As a parts distribution salesman for Hibernia Motors, Ben is provided with a company car for driving to the various garages in his sales area. Although Hibernia Motors has a well-publicised policy prohibiting staff from carrying passengers in company vehicles, Ben sometimes gives Neil a lift home from work. Ben was leaving work early one evening to make a delivery of car parts to a customer on his way home, when he agreed that Neil could accompany him to make the delivery and then continue the journey home. Neil helped Ben to carry car parts into the customer s showroom. Ben drove at high speed on the return journey and the car crashed. Ben was uninjured in the accident. However, Neil suffered serious injuries and is claiming in negligence against Hibernia Motors. Contrary to the policy prohibiting staff from carrying passengers in company vehicles Ed, a mechanic with Hibernia Motors, invited two boys from the local school to take a demonstration drive in a new people carrier that had just arrived into Hibernia Motors showrooms. Ed drove to a secluded park where he committed acts of sexual assault against the boys. Advise Hibernia Motors as to its liability in tort (if any) to Neil and the boys. (15 marks) (b) Hibernia Motors suffered a serious decline in business during the recession and was forced to make severe staff cut-backs. The workload of all staff increased significantly but when two members of the administrative staff were made redundant, Wanda, an employee, had to take over their workload as well as her own. After two months of struggling to meet the demands of her job, Wanda began to exhibit signs of severe stress. Her colleagues were concerned about this and Wanda s stress was widely discussed in the office. Wanda was advised to speak to James, her line manager, about her stress but she refused to do so. Her reason was that if Hibernia Motors knew that she was unable to cope that she too might be made redundant. Wanda s condition deteriorated because of her workload and she suffered a nervous breakdown. She has now started proceedings against Hibernia Motors. Advise Hibernia Motors as to its possible liability for Wanda s nervous breakdown. (10 Marks) (Total: 25 marks) Turn over Page 5 of 8

6 Question 4 Global Breweries plc ( Global ) entered into a contract with Rhino Ltd ( Rhino ), a building company, for the construction of a new public house called The Ark. George, Rhino s site manager, managed the building process and the construction site of The Ark. Rhino sub-contracted skilled tasks to various specialist sub-contractors and individuals. Emeryk, an electrician, and Izaak, a plasterer, both worked for Rhino as self-employed sub-contractors. Emeryk installed the electrical cables into the rooms of The Ark on Monday. On Tuesday Izaak plastered the walls of the rooms on the first floor of the building. When Izaak returned on Wednesday to plaster the rooms of the ground floor, Emeryk was already at work, testing the electrical circuits he had installed on Monday. George wanted the contract to be finished as quickly as possible so he allowed Izaak and Emeryk to continue working in the building at the same time. Neither Izaak nor Emeryk knew that the other was working in the building. When Izaak began work, the water in the wet plaster came into contact with the live electrical wires. Izaak was electrocuted as a result. He suffered severe burns to his hands and arms. Josh, a building inspector, entered The Ark to inspect the structural work already carried out by Rhino. Josh inadvertently brushed against a recently plastered wall. He received a severe electric shock and suffered a heart attack. Tim is seven years old. His family owns a house that adjoins the construction site for The Ark. The house is separated from the construction site by a 10 feet high steel mesh fence. At the base of the fence was a hole big enough for a person to crawl through. The grass on both sides of the hole had been worn away. Tim crawled through the hole in the fence and entered onto the construction site. Attempting to avoid being seen, he ran towards The Ark but fell into a ditch, which he had failed to notice. His ankle was broken and his expensive jeans were ripped as a result of his fall. Advise Tim s parents, Izaak and Josh on the likely success of any claim they may bring under the Occupier s Liability Acts 1957 and End of Examination Paper 2014 The Chartered Institute of Legal Executives Page 6 of 8

7 BLANK PAGE Page 7 of 8

8 BLANK PAGE Page 8 of 8

THE CHARTERED INSTITUTE OF LEGAL EXECUTIVES UNIT 13 LAW OF TORT *

14 June 2017 Level 6 LAW OF TORT Subject Code L6-13 THE CHARTERED INSTITUTE OF LEGAL EXECUTIVES UNIT 13 LAW OF TORT * Time allowed: 3 hours plus 15 minutes reading time Instructions to Candidates You have