SQE1 Tort practice questions

Tort is assessed in FLK1. It covers negligence (duty of care, breach, causation and remoteness), occupiers' liability, product liability, nuisance, vicarious liability, defences and remedies. Negligence is largely case law; the main statutes are the Occupiers' Liability Act 1957, the Occupiers' Liability Act 1984, the Consumer Protection Act 1987 and the Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945. Questions usually ask which element of a claim succeeds or fails on the facts, so work through the elements in order. Every question below links to the source behind its answer.

Rules to remember

An occupier may expect a skilled visitor to guard against the special risks ordinarily incident to their calling (OLA 1957 s.2(3)(b)). Question 04

An occupier who keeps an exceptionally dangerous thing in extraordinary circumstances is strictly liable for foreseeable damage to a neighbour's property from its escape, but not for personal injury. Question L274

Coming to the nuisance is no defence, planning permission normally does not assist a defendant in nuisance, and the choice between injunction and damages in lieu is discretionary. Question L273

Only a person with an interest in the affected land (or exclusive possession) can sue in private nuisance; licensees such as family members cannot. Question L272

Under CPA 1987 s.2, the producer, an own-brander holding itself out as producer, and the importer into the UK are each liable, jointly and severally, for damage caused by a defective product. Question L271

A trader cannot by a consumer contract term or consumer notice exclude or restrict liability for death or personal injury resulting from negligence (CRA 2015 s.65). Question L270

An occupier is ordinarily under no duty to protect adults of full capacity from obvious risks inherent in activities they freely choose to undertake on its land. Question L269

An occupier is not answerable for a contractor's faulty work if it reasonably entrusted the work to the contractor and took reasonable steps to check the contractor's competence and the work. Question L268

An employer is vicariously liable where the employee's wrong is so closely connected with the field of activities entrusted to him that it is right to hold the employer liable. Question L267

A defendant is not vicariously liable for a tortfeasor who is carrying on his own independent business; the relationship must be employment or akin to employment. Question L266

Where an employee is injured by defective work equipment and the defect is due to a third party's fault, the injury is deemed attributable to the employer's negligence (EL(DE)A 1969 s.1). Question L265

A claimant convicted of manslaughter with significant personal responsibility cannot recover losses flowing from the sentence or the killing (Gray, affirmed in Henderson), but pre-offence pain and suffering is recoverable. Question L264

A passenger's agreement or willing acceptance of the risk of the driver's negligence does not negative the insured driver's liability (RTA 1988 s.149), though contributory negligence may still reduce damages. Question L263

Contributory negligence does not defeat a claim; damages are reduced to the extent the court thinks just and equitable having regard to the claimant's share in responsibility for the damage. Question L262

Bereavement damages are available only to a spouse or civil partner, a cohabiting partner of at least two years, or the parents of an unmarried minor. Question L261

A deceased's causes of action survive for his estate, but the estate cannot recover exemplary damages or loss of income for any period after death; funeral expenses may be included. Question L260

Damage is not too remote if it is of a type or description that was reasonably foreseeable; neither the precise manner in which it occurred nor its extent need be foreseen. Question L259

A rescuer is a primary victim only if exposed, or reasonably believing herself exposed, to physical danger; otherwise she must satisfy the secondary victim rules, including a close tie with a victim. Question L258

Under UCTA 1977 ss.2(2) and 13(1), a notice excluding negligence liability (or the duty itself) for loss other than personal injury is effective only if reasonable, judged under s.11(3) for non-contractual notices. Question L257

A solicitor generally owes no duty to the opposite party; a duty for a misstatement requires an assumption of responsibility, including reasonable reliance that the solicitor should reasonably have foreseen. Question L256

Physical damage and economic loss consequential on it are recoverable in negligence, but pure economic loss independent of physical damage (such as lost production during a power cut) is generally not. Question L255

In mesothelioma cases, each negligent exposer liable in tort is liable for the whole damage, jointly and severally, with contribution between defendants normally by relative periods of exposure. Question L254

Doctors must take reasonable care that patients know of material risks and reasonable alternatives; a risk is material if a reasonable patient, or this patient to the doctor's knowledge, would consider it significant. Question L253

A defendant with mental illness is judged by the objective reasonable person standard and escapes liability only if the illness entirely eliminated his responsibility, making his conduct wholly involuntary. Question L252

There is generally no duty to prevent harm from a danger one did not create, unless one assumed responsibility, prevented others helping, controlled the danger, or holds a protective status. Question L251

Public authorities, including the police, owe the ordinary duty to take care not to cause foreseeable personal injury by their positive acts; the special rules restricting liability concern omissions to protect people from third parties. Question L250

After Paul v Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust, a secondary victim must witness an accident or its immediate aftermath; witnessing death or injury from negligently untreated disease does not ground a claim. Question 18

An occupier owes a trespasser a duty of reasonable care against injury only where the three conditions in OLA 1984 s.1(3) are met, and that duty never covers damage to the trespasser's property (s.1(8)). Question 32

Under CPA 1987 s.5, damage covers personal injury and private property damage over £275, but never loss of or damage to the defective product itself. Question 46