Full Test Bank Duty Of Care Basic Principles Chapter 3

Chapter 3: Duty of care: basic principles

Test Bank

Type: matching question

Title: Chapter 03 Question 01

1) Complete the case name for each of the following cases.

a. Anns v = Merton LBC

b. Murphy v = Brentwood DC

c. Caparo Industries v = Dickman

d. Donoghue v = Stevenson

Type: multiple response question

Title: Chapter 03 Question 02

2) In relation to which of the following situations might establishing a duty of care be considered ‘unproblematic’? Please select all that apply.

a. A doctor misreads an x-ray and as a result fails to diagnose their patient’s illness correctly.

b. A pedestrian suffers minor injuries when they are hit by a car which has ‘jumped’ a red traffic light.

c. An employee suffers a nervous breakdown caused by their unreasonable workload.

d. A financial advisor confuses the shareholder’s report of a highly successful company with one that is on the verge of bankruptcy. As a result, they tell their client to buy shares in the latter company which goes bankrupt two weeks later.

Type: multiple response question

Title: Chapter 03 Question 03

3) Why might the courts be reluctant to impose a duty of care in certain situations? Please select all that apply.

a. To avoid imposing ‘crushing liability’ on a particular individual or class of defendants

b. To stop a ‘flood’ of claims which may in turn clog up or slow down the tort system as a mechanism for compensation

c. To prevent over self-regulation by potential defendants in relation to beneficial yet ‘risky’ activities

d. Because the defendant has simply done nothing wrong – it is sometimes entirely reasonable to act in ways that leave others worse off

Type: multiple choice question

Title: Chapter 03 Question 04

4) Which case is the following quote from?

‘… in addition to the foreseeability of damage, necessary ingredients in any situation giving rise to a duty of care are that there should exist between the party owing the duty and the party to whom it is owed a relationship characterised by the law as one of ‘proximity’ or ‘neighbourhood’ and that the situation should be one in which the court considers it fair, just and reasonable that the law should impose a duty of a given scope on the one party for the benefit of the other’.

a. Anns v Merton LBC

b. Murphy v Brentwood DC

c. Caparo Industries v Dickman

d. Donoghue v Stevenson

Type: true-false

Title: Chapter 03 Question 05

5) Caparo sets out a ‘three stage test’ that must be applied in all cases where there is a novel duty situation.

a. True

b. False

Type: true-false

Title: Chapter 03 Question 06

6) Caparo sets out a ‘three stage test’ that must be applied in all cases where there is a novel duty situation.

a. True

b. False

Type: true-false

Title: Chapter 03 Question 07

7) The Supreme Court in Robinson v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire [2018] rejected the Caparo three-stage ‘test’

a. False

b. True

Type: multiple choice question

Title: Chapter 03 Question 08

8) Why did later courts reject Lord Atkin’s neighbour principle?

a. Because it was too broad

b. Because it was too narrow

c. Because it was too straightforward

Type: multiple choice question

Title: Chapter 03 Question 09

9) From where did the House of Lords in Caparo Industries v Dickman take the incremental by analogy approach?

a. Donoghue v Stevenson

b. Anns v Merton London Borough Council

c. Sutherland Shire Council v Heyman

d. The Nicolas H

Type: multiple response question

Title: Chapter 03 – Question 10

10) In which of these cases was a duty of care denied? Please select all that apply.

a. Hill v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire

b. Anns v Merton London Borough Council

c. Caparo Industries v Dickman

d. The Nicolas H

Type: matching question

Title: Chapter 03 Question 11

11) For each of the following cases, match the case name to the correct date [AC citation].

a. Donoghue v Stevenson = 1932

b. Caparo Industries plc v Dickman = 1990

c. X (Minors) v Bedfordshire County Council = 1995

d. Smith v Littlewoods = 1987