I85PREP
⌘ K
FE-1 Law of Torts study materials
FE-1 Law of Torts study resources

FE-1 Law of Torts practice questions

One question at a time. Build your FE-1 Law of Torts understanding.

First 50 of 200 questions. Each one lists the choices, the correct answer, and an explanation. The checker at the top of this page saves progress in this browser when it is available.

Continue in the practice tool above to load more questions, 50 at a time.

Question 1Law of Torts

In the tort of negligence, what is the standard of care against which a defendant's conduct is measured?

  1. The conduct of an average child of the same age
  2. The conduct of a reasonable person in the defendant's circumstances Correct answer.
  3. The defendant's own usual standard of care in their daily life
  4. The conduct of the most careful person reasonably imaginable

Explanation

Negligence sets an objective standard: the defendant must act as a reasonable person would in the same circumstances. Personal idiosyncrasies and sincere but substandard efforts do not lower that threshold. Courts adjust the reasonable person only for specific factors such as age, disability, or special skill.

Question 2Law of Torts

Which element must a claimant establish to succeed in a claim for battery?

  1. That the defendant intended to cause physical harm
  2. That the defendant applied unlawful force to the claimant intentionally Correct answer.
  3. That the defendant acted with malice toward the claimant
  4. That the claimant suffered medically verified injury

Explanation

Battery requires an intentional application of unlawful force to another person. The defendant need not intend harm, and hostility or malice is not required; the intention goes to the contact itself. Proof of actual injury is also unnecessary, since any unwanted touching may suffice.

Question 3Law of Torts

A landowner keeps a large aggressive dog that has never escaped. It breaks through a fence and bites a neighbour. Which tort most directly governs the landowner's liability?

  1. Strict liability under the rule in Rylands v Fletcher
  2. Trespass to land, because the dog left the property
  3. Liability for animals escaping from the land Correct answer.
  4. Negligence, because the owner failed to maintain the fence

Explanation

Liability for harm caused by animals is governed by the specific rules on dangerous and non-dangerous animals, including liability for escape from land. The keeper of an animal known to be dangerous may be strictly liable for the harm it causes. General negligence and trespass are not the primary routes here.

Question 4Law of Torts

Which statement best describes the 'but for' test used in proving factual causation?

  1. The defendant's act must be the most substantial cause of the harm
  2. The defendant's act must have been foreseeable to a reasonable person
  3. The defendant must have been the last person to touch the claimant
  4. The harm would not have occurred but for the defendant's breach Correct answer.

Explanation

The 'but for' test asks whether, on the balance of probabilities, the harm would have happened without the defendant's breach. If the harm would have occurred anyway, factual causation fails. It is a counterfactual inquiry distinct from questions of remoteness or breach.

Question 5Law of Torts

A driver breaches a duty of care and the claimant's leg is broken in the collision. While recovering in hospital, the claimant develops an infection from negligent medical treatment. How are the additional injuries generally treated?

  1. They are never recoverable because the hospital, not the driver, caused them
  2. They are recoverable if the original injury made the treatment reasonably necessary Correct answer.
  3. They break the chain of causation because medical negligence is a new act
  4. They are recoverable only if the driver foresaw the exact infection

Explanation

Where the claimant's original injury necessitates medical treatment, subsequent negligent treatment is generally treated as within the chain of causation. The original tortfeasor remains liable for that consequential harm. Only an independent event unrelated to the injury would normally break the chain.

Question 6Law of Torts

What is the core purpose of the tort of defamation?

  1. To prevent disclosure of confidential business information
  2. To punish insulting behaviour in public
  3. To protect a person's reputation from unjustified harm Correct answer.
  4. To compensate for emotional distress without publication

Explanation

Defamation protects reputation against the publication of statements that tend to lower a person in the estimation of right-thinking members of society. It requires publication to a third party and a defamatory meaning. It is not a remedy for mere insults or for distress without publication.

Question 7Law of Torts

In a claim for private nuisance, which interest is primarily protected?

  1. A person's right to their reputation
  2. A person's right to bodily integrity
  3. A person's right to quiet enjoyment and use of their land Correct answer.
  4. A person's right to exclusive possession against trespassers

Explanation

Private nuisance protects a landowner or occupier's use and enjoyment of land from unreasonable interference. It is concerned with indirect interference such as noise, fumes, or smells. Bodily integrity is protected by trespass to the person, and reputation by defamation.

Question 8Law of Torts

Which factor is most relevant when deciding whether interference amounts to an unreasonable use of land in private nuisance?

  1. The financial value of the defendant's business to the local economy
  2. The duration and intensity of the interference Correct answer.
  3. The defendant's subjective intention to be neighbourly
  4. The claimant's sensitivity to the activity, even if abnormal

Explanation

Courts weigh factors such as duration, intensity, frequency, and the character of the locality. Abnormal sensitivity of the claimant is generally disregarded, and the social utility of the activity is only one factor. The reasonableness of the interference is judged objectively.

Question 9Law of Torts

What does the tort of conversion involve?

  1. Temporarily borrowing goods with the owner's permission
  2. Dealing with another's goods in a way that seriously denies the owner's rights Correct answer.
  3. Accidentally damaging goods while using them lawfully
  4. Refusing to return a borrowed book after one week

Explanation

Conversion is an intentional dealing with goods that is inconsistent with the owner's right of possession, such as selling or destroying them. It amounts to a denial of the claimant's title. Mere temporary interference or authorised use falls short of conversion.

Question 10Law of Torts

An occupier is visited by a firefighter who is injured while tackling a fire on the premises. Which occupier's liability rule is most relevant?

  1. The occupier owes the common duty of care owed to visitors Correct answer.
  2. The occupier owes only a duty not to act maliciously
  3. The occupier owes no duty to professional rescuers
  4. The occupier owes a duty limited to warning of obvious risks

Explanation

Occupiers' liability legislation imposes a common duty of care on occupiers towards visitors, and firefighters entering in the course of duty are visitors. The duty is to take reasonable care to see that visitors are reasonably safe. It is not extinguished merely because the visitor is a professional rescuer.

Question 11Law of Torts

Which of the following is an essential ingredient of the tort of deceit?

  1. A statement of opinion honestly held
  2. An innocent misrepresentation made without any fault
  3. A false representation made knowingly or recklessly, intended to be relied upon Correct answer.
  4. A negligent misstatement made in the course of business

Explanation

Deceit requires a false representation made with knowledge of its falsity or reckless indifference to truth, with the intention that the claimant rely on it. The claimant must actually be deceived and suffer loss. Negligent or innocent misstatements belong to different causes of action.

Question 12Law of Torts

What is the primary function of the tort of trespass to land?

  1. To protect a landowner against defamatory statements
  2. To impose strict liability for escapes of dangerous substances
  3. To protect a person's possession of land against direct physical intrusion Correct answer.
  4. To compensate for indirect interference such as noise

Explanation

Trespass to land is actionable per se and protects possession against direct, unauthorised entry onto land. It concerns physical intrusion, not indirect interference like noise or fumes. Indirect interference is the concern of nuisance, and escapes of dangerous substances fall under Rylands v Fletcher.

Question 13Law of Torts

A claimant suffers psychiatric illness after witnessing a serious accident involving a close relative. Which requirement is central to a claim as a secondary victim?

  1. The claimant must have suffered physical injury as well
  2. The claimant must have been warned of the risk beforehand
  3. The claimant must be a blood relative of the primary victim
  4. The claimant must have been physically present at the scene or its immediate aftermath Correct answer.

Explanation

Secondary victims must generally satisfy control mechanisms, including close ties of love and affection and presence at the scene or its immediate aftermath. They must also suffer a recognised psychiatric illness caused by the shocking event. Physical injury is not required.

Question 14Law of Torts

What does the doctrine of vicarious liability require in the employment context?

  1. The employer must have been personally negligent in hiring the employee
  2. The employee must be unable to pay damages
  3. There must be a relationship of employment and a close connection between the tort and that relationship Correct answer.
  4. The employee must have acted with the employer's express authority

Explanation

Vicarious liability makes an employer liable for torts committed by an employee where there is a sufficient connection between the employment relationship and the wrongdoing. It does not depend on any personal fault of the employer. The employee's own liability is not extinguished.

Question 15Law of Torts

Which defence, if established, completely defeats a claim in tort by showing the claimant freely consented to the risk?

  1. Contributory negligence
  2. Volenti non fit injuria Correct answer.
  3. Statutory authority
  4. Inevitable accident

Explanation

Volenti non fit injuria is a complete defence where the claimant freely and knowingly consented to the risk of harm. Contributory negligence, by contrast, only reduces damages. The defence requires knowledge of the risk and a voluntary acceptance of it.

Question 16Law of Torts

A patient is told by a doctor that a procedure carries a small risk of nerve damage. The patient agrees to proceed and the risk materialises. Which factor is most important in deciding whether the defence of volenti applies?

  1. Whether the procedure was medically necessary
  2. Whether the patient signed a consent form
  3. Whether the patient knew of and freely accepted the specific risk Correct answer.
  4. Whether the doctor warned of every conceivable risk

Explanation

Volenti requires actual knowledge of the specific risk and a free and informed acceptance of it. A signed form is evidence but not conclusive, and the defence is difficult to establish in medical cases. The focus is on the claimant's subjective acceptance of the risk.

Question 17Law of Torts

What is the effect of the defence of contributory negligence on a successful claim?

  1. It reduces the damages awarded in proportion to the claimant's share of responsibility Correct answer.
  2. It suspends the limitation period
  3. It transfers liability to a third party
  4. It defeats the claim entirely

Explanation

Contributory negligence is a partial defence that reduces the damages the claimant recovers according to their share of responsibility for the harm. It does not extinguish the claim. The court apportions damages based on what is just and equitable.

Question 18Law of Torts

In an action for breach of statutory duty, what must the claimant generally show?

  1. That the defendant acted with intent to cause harm
  2. That the statute imposes a criminal penalty only
  3. That the claimant is a public authority
  4. That the statute intended to create a civil right of action for the harm suffered Correct answer.

Explanation

A claim for breach of statutory duty requires the claimant to show that the statute was intended to confer a civil remedy on a class including the claimant. Not every statutory breach gives rise to a tort action. The court examines the purpose and wording of the statute.

Question 19Law of Torts

Which statement correctly describes the tort of passing off?

  1. It protects registered trade marks against infringement
  2. It protects confidential information from disclosure
  3. It protects a person's reputation from defamatory statements
  4. It protects goodwill against misrepresentation likely to damage it Correct answer.

Explanation

Passing off protects the goodwill of a business against a misrepresentation by another that is likely to cause damage. The classic elements are goodwill, misrepresentation, and damage. It operates alongside, but is distinct from, registered trade mark protection.

Question 20Law of Torts

A factory emits fumes that corrode metal on a neighbouring property. Which cause of action is most appropriate?

  1. Trespass to land, because particles entered the land
  2. Private nuisance, because of indirect interference with use and enjoyment Correct answer.
  3. Negligence, because the factory owed a duty to all neighbours
  4. Rylands v Fletcher, because the factory is a business

Explanation

Deposits of fumes or particles causing indirect interference with the use and enjoyment of land are typically addressed through private nuisance. Trespass requires direct physical entry, which is not present here. Rylands v Fletcher may apply in some escape cases but nuisance is the natural fit for ongoing fumes.

Question 21Law of Torts

Which of the following best describes the 'eggshell skull' rule in tort?

  1. The defendant takes the victim as found, including unusual susceptibility Correct answer.
  2. The claimant must disclose all pre-existing conditions before the incident
  3. The defendant is liable only for physical injuries, not psychiatric ones
  4. The defendant is liable only for foreseeable extent of injury

Explanation

The eggshell skull rule holds that a tortfeasor is liable for the full extent of harm even if the victim's unusual susceptibility made the injury worse than expected. The defendant must take the victim as found. The rule concerns the extent of damage, not the type of harm.

Question 22Law of Torts

A hospital employee, acting in the course of employment, negligently injures a patient. Which statement about the hospital's liability is correct?

  1. The hospital is liable only if the employee is insolvent
  2. The hospital is never liable for the acts of medical staff
  3. The hospital is liable only if it was personally negligent in training the employee
  4. The hospital is vicariously liable for the employee's negligence Correct answer.

Explanation

An employer is vicariously liable for torts committed by employees in the course of their employment. The hospital need not be personally at fault. This principle allows the claimant to recover from the employer even where the individual employee cannot pay.

Question 23Law of Torts

What is the limitation period, in general, for bringing a claim in tort for personal injury in England and Wales?

  1. Twelve years from the date of the injury
  2. Six years from the date of the injury
  3. Three years from the date of the injury or knowledge Correct answer.
  4. One year from the date of the injury

Explanation

Under the Limitation Act 1980, the general limitation period for personal injury claims in tort is three years from the date the cause of action accrued or the date of knowledge, if later. The court has discretion to extend the period in limited circumstances. Other tort claims generally have a six-year period.

Question 24Law of Torts

Which of the following is a recognised category of trespass to the person?

  1. Assault, battery, and false imprisonment Correct answer.
  2. Negligence, nuisance, and defamation
  3. Deceit, passing off, and malicious falsehood
  4. Conversion, detinue, and trespass to goods

Explanation

Trespass to the person comprises assault, battery, and false imprisonment. These torts protect a person's physical integrity and liberty. The other options list torts protecting property, reputation, or economic interests.

Question 25Law of Torts

A defendant publishes a statement that is true but embarrassing to the claimant. Which defence is most likely to succeed in a defamation claim?

  1. Justification, because the statement is substantially true Correct answer.
  2. Absolute privilege, because the statement is embarrassing
  3. Fair comment, because the statement is an opinion
  4. Innocent dissemination, because the defendant believed it

Explanation

Truth, now termed the defence of truth or justification, defeats a defamation claim where the defendant proves the imputation is substantially true. Embarrassment alone does not make a true statement actionable. Privilege and honest opinion require additional conditions that are not satisfied here.

Question 26Law of Torts

Which case established the modern 'neighbour principle' that underpins the duty of care in negligence?

  1. Rylands v Fletcher
  2. Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee
  3. Donoghue v Stevenson Correct answer.
  4. Caparo Industries plc v Dickman

Explanation

Donoghue v Stevenson (1932) is the foundational case in which Lord Atkin articulated the neighbour principle, requiring reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions likely to injure one's neighbour. It remains the starting point for establishing a duty of care in negligence.

Question 27Law of Torts

In the Caparo test for a novel duty of care, which three elements must generally be satisfied?

  1. Foreseeability, malice, and publication
  2. Intention, causation, and remoteness
  3. Foreseeability of damage, proximity, and fair, just and reasonable imposition of a duty Correct answer.
  4. Breach, damage, and contributory negligence

Explanation

Caparo Industries plc v Dickman established that, for novel situations, a duty of care arises where damage is reasonably foreseeable, there is a relationship of proximity, and it is fair, just and reasonable to impose the duty. These three limbs are applied cumulatively.

Question 28Law of Torts

Under the 'but for' test in factual causation, the claimant must show that:

  1. The damage was foreseeable to a reasonable person
  2. The defendant's conduct was the most significant cause of the damage
  3. The damage would not have occurred but for the defendant's breach Correct answer.
  4. The defendant intended to cause the damage

Explanation

The 'but for' test asks whether, on the balance of probabilities, the harm would have occurred without the defendant's breach. If the damage would have happened regardless, factual causation fails.

Question 29Law of Torts

A claimant's injury is caused by two independent tortfeasors acting separately, and either cause alone would have produced the same harm. How do the courts generally treat liability in such a case?

  1. Neither is liable because causation cannot be established
  2. Liability is apportioned equally between them by operation of law
  3. Each tortfeasor is liable in full, and the claimant may recover from either Correct answer.
  4. The claimant must sue both jointly or recover nothing

Explanation

Where independent tortfeasors each cause the same indivisible harm and the 'but for' test cannot isolate one cause, each is treated as jointly liable for the whole damage. The claimant can enforce the judgment against any one of them, subject to the rule against double recovery.

Question 30Law of Torts

Which statement best describes the 'thin skull' principle in assessing damages for negligence?

  1. A defendant is liable only for injuries a reasonable person would foresee
  2. A defendant is excused from liability if the injury is unusually severe
  3. A defendant takes the claimant as found, including any unusual susceptibility to injury Correct answer.
  4. A claimant's pre-existing condition always reduces recoverable damages

Explanation

Under the thin skull rule, a tortfeasor is liable for the full extent of harm caused, even if the claimant's unusual susceptibility made the injury more severe than expected. The defendant must take the victim as found.

Question 31Law of Torts

A defendant's negligence causes a claimant to suffer a psychiatric illness as a result of witnessing a distressing event. Which case is the leading authority on liability for psychiatric harm to secondary victims?

  1. Barnett v Chelsea and Kensington Hospital Management Committee
  2. Latimer v AEC Ltd
  3. Bolton v Stone
  4. Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police Correct answer.

Explanation

Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police established the control mechanisms for secondary victims, including close ties of love and affection, presence at the scene, direct perception, and a sudden shocking event. It remains the key authority on psychiatric harm.

Question 32Law of Torts

Which statement correctly describes the 'res ipsa loquitur' doctrine in negligence?

  1. It shifts the burden of proof entirely to the defendant in all negligence cases
  2. It allows an inference of negligence where the accident is of a kind that ordinarily does not occur without negligence and the thing causing it was under the defendant's control Correct answer.
  3. It applies only where the claimant can identify the precise negligent act
  4. It establishes strict liability for any accident occurring on the defendant's premises

Explanation

Res ipsa loquitur ('the thing speaks for itself') permits an inference of negligence where the accident would not ordinarily happen without negligence and the instrumentality was under the defendant's control. It is an evidential device, not a reversal of the burden of proof.

Question 33Law of Torts

In an action for negligence, which of the following is the correct standard of care for a learner driver?

  1. The standard of an ordinary pedestrian
  2. The standard of a reasonably competent, qualified driver Correct answer.
  3. No duty is owed until the learner passes their test
  4. A lower standard reflecting their inexperience

Explanation

Learner drivers are judged by the standard of a reasonably competent, qualified driver, not by their own inexperience. The standard of care is objective and does not vary with the defendant's lack of skill.

Question 34Law of Torts

A professional is alleged to have been negligent. Under the Bolam test, as modified by Bolam and Bolitho, a professional is not negligent if:

  1. They can show that another professional would have made the same mistake
  2. They acted in good faith and with honest intention
  3. They followed the majority view of their professional body in all circumstances
  4. They acted in accordance with a practice accepted as proper by a responsible body of practitioners, and that practice is not irrational Correct answer.

Explanation

Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee established that a professional is not negligent if they act in accordance with a responsible body of professional opinion. Bolitho v City and Hackney HA added that the practice must withstand logical analysis and not be irrational.

Question 35Law of Torts

Which of the following best describes the defence of volenti non fit injuria?

  1. The claimant knowingly and voluntarily consented to the risk of harm Correct answer.
  2. The defendant took reasonable precautions to avoid the harm
  3. The claimant failed to mitigate their losses after the injury
  4. The claimant was partly at fault for their own injury

Explanation

Volenti non fit injuria is a complete defence that applies where the claimant, with full knowledge of the risk, freely and voluntarily agreed to accept it. Consent must be genuine and informed.

Question 36Law of Torts

What is the effect of the defence of illegality (ex turpi causa non oritur actio) on a tort claim?

  1. It automatically reduces damages by half
  2. It may defeat the claim entirely where the claimant's illegal conduct is central to the circumstances giving rise to the harm Correct answer.
  3. It has no application to tort claims
  4. It transfers liability to the state

Explanation

The defence of illegality can bar a claim where the claimant's own criminal conduct is integral to the circumstances of the harm, as in Patel v Mirza's policy-based approach. It is a complete defence where it applies.

Question 37Law of Torts

A defendant's negligence causes injury to a claimant who was not wearing a seatbelt at the time of a car accident. How is the claimant's failure to wear a seatbelt generally treated?

  1. As irrelevant, because the defendant caused the accident
  2. As contributory negligence, reducing damages to the extent the injury was caused by that failure Correct answer.
  3. As a breach of statutory duty by the claimant, barring the claim
  4. As volenti, defeating the claim entirely

Explanation

Failure to wear a seatbelt is treated as contributory negligence under the Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945, reducing damages to the extent the injury was caused by that failure. It does not defeat the claim entirely.

Question 38Law of Torts

Which of the following is the correct description of the tort of battery?

  1. The intentional causing of apprehension of immediate unlawful force
  2. The confinement of a person within a bounded area
  3. The intentional application of unlawful force to another person Correct answer.
  4. The negligent infliction of physical harm

Explanation

Battery is the intentional application of unlawful force to another person without consent. It requires direct contact and intention, though not necessarily hostility or injury.

Question 39Law of Torts

A security guard wrongly detains a shopper in a back room for twenty minutes on suspicion of theft. Which tort has most clearly been committed?

  1. Battery
  2. Defamation
  3. Conversion
  4. False imprisonment Correct answer.

Explanation

False imprisonment is the intentional and complete restriction of a person's freedom of movement without lawful justification. Detaining the shopper in a back room without lawful authority satisfies those elements.

Question 40Law of Torts

In the tort of private nuisance, which of the following best describes the required interference?

  1. Substantial and unreasonable interference with the claimant's use or enjoyment of land Correct answer.
  2. A single act of negligence causing personal injury
  3. Any physical entry onto the claimant's land without permission
  4. Damage to reputation caused by a false statement

Explanation

Private nuisance requires an unlawful, substantial and unreasonable interference with the claimant's use or enjoyment of land. The court balances factors such as locality, duration, sensitivity and malice.

Question 41Law of Torts

Which case is the leading authority on the rule in Rylands v Fletcher concerning liability for the escape of dangerous things from land?

  1. Hunter v Canary Wharf Ltd, which created the rule
  2. Cambridge Water Co v Eastern Counties Leather plc, which abolished the rule
  3. Rylands v Fletcher itself, establishing liability for the escape of a dangerous thing brought onto land for a non-natural use Correct answer.
  4. Read v J Lyons & Co Ltd, which extended the rule to personal injury

Explanation

Rylands v Fletcher established that a person who brings onto their land something likely to do mischief if it escapes, in the course of a non-natural use, is liable for damage caused by its escape. Cambridge Water later added a requirement of foreseeability of the relevant type of damage.

Question 42Law of Torts

Which statement best describes the tort of defamation in England and Wales?

  1. It protects a person's goods from unauthorised dealing
  2. It protects a person's land from unreasonable interference
  3. It protects a person's physical safety from unlawful force
  4. It protects a person's reputation from false statements published to a third party that cause or are likely to cause serious harm Correct answer.

Explanation

Defamation protects reputation against false statements published to a third party. Since the Defamation Act 2013, a body trading for profit must also show serious financial loss, and serious harm is required for all claimants.

Question 43Law of Torts

A newspaper publishes a statement that a local councillor has taken bribes. The statement is false. Which defence is most likely to be available to the newspaper if it can show it acted responsibly and the statement was in the public interest?

  1. The defence of absolute privilege
  2. The public interest defence under section 4 of the Defamation Act 2013 Correct answer.
  3. The defence of honest opinion under section 3 of the Defamation Act 2013
  4. The defence of truth under section 2 of the Defamation Act 2013

Explanation

Section 4 of the Defamation Act 2013 provides a public interest defence where the statement was, or formed part of, a statement on a matter of public interest and the defendant reasonably believed publishing it was in the public interest. It replaced the common law Reynolds defence.

Question 44Law of Torts

Which of the following is an essential element of the tort of malicious falsehood?

  1. A false statement published with malice that causes or is likely to cause financial loss Correct answer.
  2. A statement made only to the claimant in private
  3. A true statement published to a third party
  4. A false statement published without any need to prove malice

Explanation

Malicious falsehood requires a false statement published to a third party, made with malice, and causing or likely to cause financial loss. Malice distinguishes it from defamation, where falsity and malice are not elements the claimant must prove.

Question 45Law of Torts

Which statement correctly describes the tort of inducement of breach of contract?

  1. It requires a valid contract, knowledge of that contract, and an intentional inducement causing breach without justification Correct answer.
  2. It requires only that a contract exists, regardless of knowledge
  3. It requires proof of physical damage to property
  4. It applies only to contracts of employment

Explanation

Inducement of breach of contract requires a valid contract between the claimant and a third party, knowledge of that contract by the defendant, an intentional inducement to breach, and resulting breach without lawful justification. It is an economic tort.

Question 46Law of Torts

In the tort of conversion, which of the following best describes the defendant's conduct?

  1. Dealing with the claimant's goods in a manner inconsistent with the claimant's rights of ownership Correct answer.
  2. Detaining the claimant against their will
  3. Making a false statement about the claimant's goods
  4. Negligently damaging the claimant's land

Explanation

Conversion involves an intentional dealing with another's goods that is inconsistent with the owner's rights, such as selling, destroying or wrongfully retaining them. It is distinct from trespass to goods, which concerns direct interference without denying title.

Question 47Law of Torts

An occupier owes a duty of care under the Occupiers' Liability Act 1957 to which category of persons?

  1. Persons who have never entered the premises
  2. Employees only
  3. Visitors lawfully on the premises Correct answer.
  4. Trespassers only

Explanation

The Occupiers' Liability Act 1957 governs the duty owed to visitors, meaning persons lawfully on the premises, including invitees and licensees. Trespassers are dealt with under the Occupiers' Liability Act 1984.

Question 48Law of Torts

Under the Occupiers' Liability Act 1984, when does an occupier owe a duty to a trespasser?

  1. Only where the trespasser is a child
  2. Wherever a trespasser is injured on the premises, regardless of the occupier's knowledge
  3. Where the occupier is aware of a danger or has reasonable grounds to believe it exists, knows or has reasonable grounds to believe the trespasser is in or may come into the vicinity, and the risk is one against which it is reasonable to offer protection Correct answer.
  4. Only where the occupier has invited the trespasser onto the premises

Explanation

Section 1(3) of the Occupiers' Liability Act 1984 sets out the conditions: awareness of the danger, knowledge or reasonable grounds to believe the trespasser is in the vicinity, and that the risk is one against which it is reasonable to offer protection. The duty is limited and can be discharged by taking reasonable steps.

Question 49Law of Torts

Which of the following best describes the tort of trespass to land?

  1. Unjustified interference with land in the possession of another, such as entry without permission Correct answer.
  2. Unreasonable interference with the use and enjoyment of land
  3. Negligent damage to land causing economic loss
  4. The escape of a dangerous substance from land

Explanation

Trespass to land is an intentional and direct interference with land in the possession of another, such as unauthorised entry. It is actionable without proof of damage and is distinct from nuisance, which concerns unreasonable interference with use and enjoyment.

Question 50Law of Torts

Which case established that a duty of care may be owed for negligent misstatement causing economic loss?

  1. Rylands v Fletcher
  2. Donoghue v Stevenson
  3. Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police
  4. Hedley Byrne & Co Ltd v Heller & Partners Ltd Correct answer.

Explanation

Hedley Byrne & Co Ltd v Heller & Partners Ltd established liability for negligent misstatement causing pure economic loss where there is a special relationship of reliance and an assumption of responsibility. It is a key exception to the general exclusion of pure economic loss in negligence.