SQE1 Tort & Business Law 1 — Questions and Answers
Question 1: In the tort of negligence, what three elements must a claimant establish to succeed?
- Duty of care, breach of duty, causation of damage (Correct answer)
- Intention, breach of statute, loss
- Foreseeability, malice, and damage
- Offer, acceptance, and consideration
Correct answer: Duty of care, breach of duty, causation of damage
To succeed in negligence, a claimant must prove: (1) the defendant owed them a duty of care; (2) the defendant breached that duty; and (3) the breach caused the claimant's damage, which must not be too remote.
Question 2: Which case established the modern test for duty of care in negligence using the 'neighbour principle'?
- Caparo Industries plc v Dickman [1990]
- Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] (Correct answer)
- Hedley Byrne & Co v Heller [1964]
- Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire [1992]
Correct answer: Donoghue v Stevenson [1932]
Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] established the 'neighbour principle' — you must take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions that you can reasonably foresee would be likely to injure your neighbour (those closely and directly affected by your act).
Question 3: What is the Caparo three-stage test for establishing a duty of care?
- Causation, proximity, and reasonableness
- Foreseeability of damage, proximity of relationship, and fairness/justness/reasonableness of imposing a duty (Correct answer)
- Intention, breach, and damage
- Offer, acceptance, and consideration
Correct answer: Foreseeability of damage, proximity of relationship, and fairness/justness/reasonableness of imposing a duty
The Caparo Industries plc v Dickman [1990] three-stage test requires: (1) the harm was reasonably foreseeable; (2) there was a relationship of proximity between the parties; and (3) it is fair, just, and reasonable to impose a duty.
Question 4: In tort law, what does the principle 'res ipsa loquitur' mean and when is it applied?
- The thing speaks for itself — it shifts the evidential burden when an accident would not normally happen without negligence (Correct answer)
- Latin for 'the defendant is liable' — applied in all personal injury cases
- A defence to negligence available to professionals
- A rule requiring written evidence of negligence
Correct answer: The thing speaks for itself — it shifts the evidential burden when an accident would not normally happen without negligence
'Res ipsa loquitur' (the thing speaks for itself) applies when the circumstances of an accident are such that it would not have occurred without negligence, the thing causing it was under the defendant's control, and there is no other explanation. It raises an inference of negligence.
Question 5: Under English company law, what is the main consequence of the principle of 'separate legal personality' established in Salomon v Salomon & Co Ltd [1897]?
- Shareholders are jointly liable for company debts
- A company is a legal person distinct from its shareholders, with its own rights and liabilities (Correct answer)
- Directors are personally liable for all company obligations
- A company cannot own property in its own name
Correct answer: A company is a legal person distinct from its shareholders, with its own rights and liabilities
Salomon v Salomon & Co Ltd [1897] established that a registered company is a legal person entirely separate from its shareholders. The company has its own rights, can own property, enter contracts, and its shareholders are not personally liable for its debts (limited liability).
Question 6: What is 'vicarious liability' in the law of tort?
- The liability of an employee for their employer's negligence
- The liability of one party (e.g., an employer) for the tortious acts of another (e.g., an employee) committed in the course of employment (Correct answer)
- The liability of a director for their company's acts
- Personal liability for acts of independent contractors
Correct answer: The liability of one party (e.g., an employer) for the tortious acts of another (e.g., an employee) committed in the course of employment
Vicarious liability makes an employer liable for tortious acts committed by an employee in the course of their employment, even if the employer was not personally negligent. The employee must also remain personally liable.
SQE1 Tort & Business Law 1
In the tort of negligence, what three elements must a claimant establish to succeed?