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

Transcription

1 13 January 2016 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 this question paper fully. However, you may make notes on this 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. This 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 & Restitution , 26th 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 BLANK PAGE Page 2 of 8

3 SECTION A (Answer at least one question from this section) 1. The but-for test is a perfectly adequate mechanism to establish a causal link between the defendant s breach of duty, and the claimant s loss in the vast majority of cases of negligence. Analyse the accuracy of this statement. (25 marks) 2. Critically analyse: (a) the distinction between primary and secondary victims in determining liability for negligently inflicted psychiatric harm; (10 marks) (b) the rules used to determine whether a secondary victim is owed a duty of care. (15 marks) (Total: 25 marks) 3. Critically analyse: (a) (b) the reasons for holding employers vicariously liable for torts committed by employees; (10 marks) the rules which determine whether an employee was acting in the course of employment when engaged in intentional wrongdoing. (15 marks) (Total: 25 marks) 4. Critically assess whether the Occupiers Liability Acts 1957 and 1984 strike a fair balance between the interests of occupiers and claimants. (25 marks) Turn over Page 3 of 8

4 SECTION B (Answer at least one question from this section) Question 1 Amal owns a large piece of rural farmland. Many years ago, Amal applied for, and was granted, planning permission to build and operate a stadium for motorcycle, banger and stock car racing on part of the farmland. The considerable popularity of these racing activities has led to their increased frequency over the years, so that events now occur both during the week and also throughout weekends. As a result, Amal s business is thriving and she employs a large number of people from the district. Two years ago, Bob bought a bungalow 800 metres from the racing track to live in with his daughter, Emily. Stefan also bought a plot of land next to Bob s on which he built a house. Bob, Emily and Stefan, who are the only local residents, have regularly complained about the noise levels from the racing track but to no avail. The nearest village, Firby, is two miles away on the opposite side of the stadium and does not suffer significant noise problems. Amal recently constructed a large fuel tank, in which to store oil for the stadium s electricity generators. One day, a huge explosion and fire occurred, causing a large cloud of acrid smoke and fumes to escape and pass over Firby. Many residents suffered soil contamination in their gardens, and some reported breathing problems. Advise Amal as to her potential liability in private nuisance, public nuisance and the tort in Rylands v Fletcher. (25 marks) Page 4 of 8

5 Question 2 Jim is a car-sprayer and panel-beater. He also runs a used car sales outlet and repair shop. Jim has recently diversified into the sale of vintage cars. Jim pays Helen, an expert in classic cars, to report on the condition and value of vintage vehicles before he bids for them at auction, prior to reselling them for a profit. Jim recently acquired a vintage 1961 Bentley S2 model at auction and displayed it in his showroom. Tahir, a customer, enquired about the Bentley. Jim told him that, while he was no expert, he believed the car could make a profit of 10,000 after some minor repairs and renovations. Jim then showed Tahir Helen s report on the car. The report was clearly addressed to Jim and marked Confidential for the addressee only. The report confirmed Jim s claim concerning the probable value of the Bentley after simple remedial work. As a result of this information, Tahir bought the car only to discover that much more extensive repairs were needed, and that there was no immediate prospect of making a profit. Darius, who had just passed his driving test, asked his close friend Selina to help him locate a car, specifying that he did not want a crash-repair vehicle. Selina had some experience of buying and selling used cars but was not a mechanic. Selina noticed that Jim, whom she did not know, was selling a second-hand VW Golf car for 5,000. Even though the bonnet appeared to have been crumpled and straightened, Selina fell in love with the car and urged Darius to buy it. She assured Darius that the car was not a crash-repair vehicle, was in very good condition and that Jim would not cheat her. Darius bought the car only to discover, two months later, that the car had previously been written off, then badly repaired, and was worthless. Freya, a mechanic employed by Jim, was blind in one eye. One day she was hammering a rusty bolt on the underside of a vehicle. A piece of metal flew into Freya s good eye, resulting in complete blindness. Freya had not been issued with any safety goggles by Jim. Advise: (a) (b) Tahir as to whether he has claims in negligent misstatement against either Helen or Jim; (10 marks) Darius as to whether he has a claim in negligent misstatement against Selina; (7 marks) (c) Freya as to whether she has a claim in negligence against Jim. (8 marks) (Total: 25 marks) Page 5 of 8 Turn over

6 Question 3 Graham worked as an assistant supervisor for Penguin Transport Ltd, a large road haulage company. Graham s line manager, Ken, was supervisor to a fleet of lorry drivers. Graham had been concerned about Ken s job performance for some time. Ken frequently failed to meet important deadlines and he often omitted to respond to work s on various matters, meaning that Graham s own workload increased considerably. Graham was also concerned because Ken recently considered 20 candidates for an office administrator s job and none of the five female applicants were shortlisted. Graham wrote an to Priya, a Human Resources Officer at Penguin Transport Ltd, which was marked private. Graham stated, I believe Ken is a very poor supervisor. He is constantly missing deadlines and I am becoming unable to cope with having to do both mine and Ken s job. Ken is also discriminating against women. Priya immediately forwarded the on to Penguin Transport s directors, its company secretary and its accountant. One day, Graham walked into the transport office to find Ken reading an online article concerning sexism in professional football. He overheard Ken remarking, What a load of rubbish! Graham was so shocked at this, he posted a message on his Facebook page stating, I think Ken is a sexist pig and should be sacked. A week later, Ken learned about Graham s posting from a mutual Facebook friend. Advise Ken as to any possible claims he may have in defamation against Graham and Priya. (25 marks) Page 6 of 8

7 Question 4 Michael, John and Eric decided to rob a convenience store on a hot summer day. John drove the getaway vehicle. He reversed the car rapidly over a grassy bank directly adjacent to the store, so that Michael and Eric could access the store quickly. In doing so, John accidentally ran over Letitia, who was stretched out on the grass sunbathing, resulting in severe injury to her left leg. Michael and Eric ran into the store. Michael pointed a gun at the cashier, Henry, and demanded that he empty the cash till. Before Henry had a chance to comply, Sophie, a customer, made a lunge for Michael s weapon. Michael instinctively pulled the trigger. The bullet passed through Sophie s body and hit Eric, seriously injuring them both. Michael, John and Eric were arrested, tried, convicted and sentenced to terms of imprisonment. They served these in Wessex prison. One day, the Prison Officers Guild called a national strike so that only a few of their members reported for duty at Wessex. As a result, the prison governor issued an order stating that all prisoners would have to remain in their cells for the day, and Michael missed out on the six hours of recreation he would normally have been permitted. After John was released at the end of his two-year sentence, it was realised that he had spent one month too long in prison. The error was due to a miscalculation by the prison governor, who omitted to reduce John s sentence under the official guidelines to reflect the period he had spent in custody awaiting trial. John had been given some powerful sedatives by the prison doctor to cope with depression throughout the last few months of his sentence, and had spent much of the time in his cell asleep. Advise: (a) (b) John and Michael as to their potential liability in the torts of assault and battery; (14 marks) John and Michael as to any claims they may have in the tort of false imprisonment. (11 marks) (Total: 25 marks) End of Examination Paper 2016 The Chartered Institute of Legal Executives Page 7 of 8

8 BLANK PAGE Page 8 of 8