Tort Law Exam Prep PDF

1. Which jurisdiction focuses on the tortfeasor’s conduct? a. England b. France c. Germany d. All of the above 2. Which statement best describes the difference between liability in tort and contract law? a. Liability means the harm caused to others. The damages in contr...

1. Which jurisdiction focuses on the tortfeasor’s conduct? a. England b. France c. Germany d. All of the above 2. Which statement best describes the difference between liability in tort and contract law? a. Liability means the harm caused to others. The damages in contract law relate to those that arise from an action or an omission, whereas damages in tort law relate to the breach of obligations owed to a party. b. Liability means the legal responsibility for damages caused to others. The damages in contract law relate to those that result from not fulfilling a contractual duty, whereas damages in tort law relate to non-contractual breaches. c. Liability means whose fault something is, and the damages that can be claimed are the same regardless of contractual law or tort law. d. None of the above 3. Which statement best describes how tort law and criminal law differ? a. If an act is regarded as criminal, then a tort claim no longer exists. b. If an act is regarded as a tort, then being criminally prosecuted is not an option. c. An act can result in both criminal as well as tortious liability, however, a party cannot be punished twice. d. The legal responsibility for damages caused to others can result in criminal, as well as tortious damages. 4. How do UK, DE and FR differ in their approach regarding protected interests and rights? a. All jurisdictions rely on case law to determine which rights can be protected. b. FR does not distinguish between protected and non-protected interests, albeit the UK and DE have an almost exhaustive list of protected interests. c. FR and UK rely on case law to determine which rights can be protected, but DE has a list. d. DE and FR rely solely on case law, whereas the UK has an exhaustive list of protected interests. 5. What are the main purposes of tort law? a. Punishment, prevention and enforcement b. Punishment, prevention and reduction of crimes  c. Compensation, prevention and in rare cases in the UK tort can also serve a punitive function d. Compensation and enforcement of the law 6. Dr. Smith is a professor at Cambridge University. During a class, she left the classroom to go to the toilet. Concerned about the possibility of students leaving the class while she was away, Dr. Smith locked the doors to the classroom, to make sure students could not leave. Which could Dr Smith potentially be found guilty of? a. Trespass b. Battery c. Assault d. Tort of trespass to persons 7. Which of the following are the French and English equivalents of le bon pere standard? a. The neighbour principle, res ipsa loquitur b. Reasonableness, typical knowledge and abilities of the social, professional, or age group the tortfeasor belongs to c. The neighbour principle, vicarious liability d. Vicarious liability, reasonableness 8. Which best defines intent? a. An awareness of the consequences of one's actions and consenting to inflicting harm. b. An awareness of the consequences of one’s action without the desire to cause harm c. Recklessness d. Strict liability 9. Damages: In a defamation case, what type of damages is awarded to compensate the plaintiff for actual financial losses that resulted from the false statement? a. Nominal b. Community service c. Punitive damages d. Compensatory damages 10. Which of the following is a common element of tort law in England, France, and Germany? a. Strict liability for all tortious acts b. A duty of care owed to all individuals  c. The need to prove fault or negligence d. Liability without fault 11. What legal principle in tort law holds a party responsible for harm caused by a defective product, even without proof of negligence? a. Negligence liability b. Strict liability c. Vicarious liability d. Absolute liability 12. In which jurisdiction will the employer's liability most likely be applied when an employee's negligent actions occur within the scope of their employment? a. England b. Germany c. France d. All of the above 13. In the context of an employer's liability, which factor is crucial in determining an employer's responsibility for an employee's actions? a. The employee’s financial means b. The level of employee supervision c. The size of the company d. The training and education of the employee 14. How can you determine the level of supervision of an employer and thereby see if the employer's liability exists? a. Check if the employee is socially and economically dependent on the employer and instructed (directed) by them b. Apply the control test: What matters is the factual control c. Apply three tests to check for control, integration (is the work integral or ancillary) and the economic reality d. All of the above tests can be used depending on the relevant jurisdiction 15. How can an employer defend themselves from the employer's liability? a. By negating liability either by reference to their own positive behaviour or through pointing out the employee’s own misdeeds b. Due to strict liability, they can never prove their innocence c. By proving that someone else committed the tort d. By training their employees, so that torts never occur. 16. What is the reason for legal causality? a. The but-for test can be insufficient in certain scenarios. b. Legal causality is the only method in figuring out if there was causation. c. Causation needs to be legal, thus legal causality exists. d. Legal causality is another word for the but-for test. 17. Two people both shoot at a silhouette in the dark within roughly 10 seconds of one another. The widow of the shot person wants to sue for damages. Who can the widow receive compensation from according to DE, FR and English law? a. Only from the first person who shot, as the person would have foreseeably died anyway. b. From the person who shot last, as this shot would have definitely killed the victim. c. From neither person, as it is ambiguous as to who fired the fatal shot. d. FR uses the solidarity principle, meaning the widow can claim compensation from both tortfeasors, DE and UK would consider them jointly or severally liable depending on whether they conspired together, and if it is unclear as to which tortfeasor caused which damage. 18. Sarah throws a stone at a window, breaking it. The owner, John, slips on the broken glass while entering the room and injures himself. If applying the but-for test, did Sarah's action cause John's injury? a. Yes, because but for Sarah throwing the stone, John would not have been injured. b. No, because John slipped on the glass due to his own fault, thus breaking the chain of causation. c. Yes, because Sarah's action was negligent. d. No, because the but-for test is not applicable in this scenario. 19. David manufactures a faulty product, which is sold to Emily. The product malfunctions, causing injury to Emily. If applying the but-for test, did David's action cause Emily's injury? a. Yes, because but for David manufacturing the faulty product, Emily would not have been injured. b. No, because Emily could have avoided the injury by using the product correctly. c. Yes, because David's action was intentional. d. No, because the but-for test is not relevant in product liability cases. 20. Alex hits Brian with a car, causing Brian to fall and break his leg. Subsequently, while being taken to the hospital, Brian's ambulance is involved in a collision with a cow that escaped from a nearby farm, aggravating his injuries. If applying legal  causation, is Alex liable for the aggravation of Brian's injuries in the second collision? a. Yes, because Alex's initial act was a foreseeable consequence leading to the second collision. b. No, because the second collision was an unforeseeable intervening act, accordingly it was too remote from the initial act. c. Yes, because the ambulance driver is also partially responsible for the injuries. d. No, because legal causation does not consider subsequent events. 21. Ingrid crashes into Klaus on the motorway. As a result, Mario is stuck behind the police and ambulance for a few hours and misses his flight. According to German law, is Ingrid liable for the damage suffered by Mario (missed flight ticket)? a. No, even though the adequacy theory was met, the scope of the rule is not meant to protect against economic loss. b. No, because Klaus was driving in an unforeseeable manner. c. Yes, because German law applies the strict liability principle in traffic law cases. d. No, because German law does not recognise strict liability in traffic law cases. 22. Hanna leaves a ladder on her property, and it falls onto the neighbour's car during a storm, damaging it. If applying the but-for test in German law, did Hanna's action cause damage to the neighbour's car? a. Yes, because but for Hanna leaving the ladder, the car would not have been damaged. b. The condition sine qua non test was met, however, because the storm was an unforeseeable natural event the adequacy theory is not met. c. Yes, because Hanna is strictly liable for any damage caused by her property. d. No, because German law only considers intentional acts in tort cases. 23. Marie places a slippery mat in front of her store, causing pedestrians to slip and fall. If applying the but-for test in French law, did Marie's action cause the injuries? a. No, because French law does not recognise slip-and-fall cases. b. No, because pedestrians should be careful while walking on the sidewalk. c. Yes, because French law focuses on the direct cause of harm. d. Yes, because but for Marie placing the slippery mat, the injuries would not have occurred. Answers: 1. A 2. B 3. D 4. B 5. C 6. D 7. B 8. A 9. D 10. C 11. B 12. D 13. B 14. D 15. A 16. A 17. D 18. A 19. A 20. B 21. A 22. B 23. D