Deck 4: Negligence

Question 1

Henry Lee runs a kiosk at a beach as a summer business. He sells a bottle of pop made by a local manufacturer to Claude Erskin, who has never heard of the brand before. There is a piece of glass in the bottle and Claude is injured and wants to sue someone. Which of the following is true?

A)Claude can only sue Henry, the retailer of the pop, since he has a contact only with him.
B)Even though Claude bought the pop from Henry, Claude can sue the manufacturer in contract.
C)Even though Claude has no contract with the manufacturer, he can sue it in tort.
D)Claude can sue both Henry and the manufacturer.
E)Claude can't successfully sue anyone.

Answer 1

E

Question 2

In which of the following cases would a fiduciary duty be breached?

A)A stockbroker advises a client to buy shares in a company in which he is a substantial shareholder without disclosing the fact of his preexisting shareholding to the client
B)A director of a company buys property from the company after misrepresenting its true value to the other members of the board of directors
C)A real estate agent who has been authorized to search for property buys a property and sells it back to his client for three times the value
D)A stockbroker advising an elderly woman on investing money after her husband died and she has no investing experience and he has her put it into a new startup he owns
E)All of the above

Answer 2

E

Question 3

Tony Bales worked at a zoo and regularly fed the rare and exotic birds. One day he opened a new, sealed bag of bird feed; poison in it penetrated the cotton gloves he was wearing, injuring his hands. The poison got into the feed when the manufacturers used a mixing machine that had been used for making chemicals without washing the apparatus. Assume there is no workers' compensation scheme in place. Which of the following is true?

A)Tony could successfully sue his employer in negligence because the injury happened during the normal course of employment.
B)Tony could successfully sue his employer in negligence because his employer had breached the standard of care expected of employers.
C)Tony could successfully sue the seed manufacturer in negligence.
D)Tony could not successfully sue the manufacturer because there was o legal relationship between them.
E)Both B and C

Answer 3

E

Question 4

In the law of negligence, in general, who do you owe a duty of care to?

A)those who pay for your services
B)all those affected by your actions
C)those who you should reasonably foresee will be affected by your actions
D)only those who you actually know
E)only those who you have a direct relationship with

Question 5

A 70 year old woman, using the escalator at the airport, dropped a glove. When she attempted to pick it up, she lost her balance and fell. As a result of the accident, she suffered a fractured vertebra. In an action by her against the company which had the responsibility of maintaining the escalator, the defendant company would argue which of the following as its best defence?

A)It did not owe her a duty of care.
B)It did not act below the standard of care
C)There were no damages suffered
D)Voluntary assumption of risk
E)Contributory negligence

Question 6

Dr. Rimbaud is a neurosurgeon in Ottawa. His patient dies after an operation. The estate sues him for negligence. The issue will be decided based on:

A)A comparison with the reasonable person.
B)A comparison with the reasonable doctor.
C)A comparison with other specialists of like skills and training.
D)Whether Dr. Rimbaud acted in good faith and integrity
E)The judgement of the College of Physicians and Surgeons.

Question 7

To establish whether or not there is a duty owed to be careful to another, the courts apply:

A)The duty-breach-damage test.
B)The reasonable person test.
C)The concerned parent test
D)The standard of conduct test
E)The reasonable foreseeability test

Question 8

Mariko, age 15, was practicing her karate moves in the park. She turned quickly and threw a punch hitting Ken, who she had not seen coming, in the nose. What tort, if any, did Mariko commit?

A)assault
B)battery
C)negligence
D)trespass
E)none, because she was under age

Question 9

Susan is the owner of residential premises which have been rented to Michael. Janice a friend of Michael tripped and fell on a broken rail, fracturing her leg in the process. Prior to the incident, Michael had advised Susan on repeated occasions, of the need to make repairs to the rail, all to no avail. Under principles of occupiers' liability law, which of the following will be liable to compensate Susan for her injuries?

A)local municipality
B)No one as Janice assumed all risk of visiting the premises
C)Susan
D)Michael
E)Both Susan and Michael

Question 10

Which of the following statements most accurately describes the concept of a fiduciary duty?

A)A duty to ensure that the affairs of another persons are well attended to
B)A duty of good to act honestly and in good faith
C)A duty to take all proper and necessary precautions in dealing with the public
D)A duty to avoid acts that will injure another person
E)A duty to act with all due diligence

Question 11

Which of the following will be most useful to a court in determining the standard of care in a case in which professional negligence has been alleged?

A)evidence from a law professor
B)evidence from another qualified person in the same field
C)the opinion of another professional
D)the opinion of a witness
E)a textbook

Question 12

Which of the following statements about damages in tort is TRUE?

A)Any damages which are reasonably foreseeable are recoverable.
B)Any damages which are the natural consequences of the tortuous conduct are recoverable.
C)The recoverability of damages is limited by the concept of remoteness.
D)Both A and C
E)All of the above

Question 13

Which of the following is required to establish negligence?

A)It was reasonably foreseeable that the plaintiff would be injured by the defendant's act.
B)The plaintiff failed to do what a reasonable person would have done in the circumstances.
C)The failure to act reasonably caused the plaintiff's injury.
D)The defendant failed to do what a reasonable person would have done under the circumstances.
E)A, C and D

Question 14

Dr. Roth is a general practitioner in rural Ontario who has misdiagnosed cancer. A cancer specialist a year later properly diagnosed it. The patient sues Dr. Roth, claiming that if the cancer had been properly diagnosed a year earlier, it could have been cured or arrested. In determining whether Dr. Roth has breached the standard of care required, the court will apply the standard of:

A)The reasonable person.
B)The reasonable rural Ontario doctor
C)The most careful Canadian doctor.
D)The reasonable urban doctor
E)The average cancer specialist.

Question 15

You have brought an action in negligence against Rose Nielson, an architect. You must prove, among other things, that her conduct fell below an acceptable standard of care. What is the standard?

A)That she acted to the best of her ability.
B)That she acted as may reasonably be expected of a normally skilled architect
C)That she acted as a reasonably prudent person
D)That she acted sincerely and with goodwill
E)Both A and D

Question 16

What question do the courts ask in deciding the standard of care to apply?

A)What would an average person in society have done?
B)Was it reasonable to foresee the damage that would occur if the act was done?
C)What would a reasonable person have done under similar circumstances?
D)What would an extremely cautious person have done under the circumstances?
E)What would I, the judge or jury, have done in the circumstances?

Question 17

Betty Webster was driving her car, talking on her cell phone about the latest episode of "The Bachelorette", and didn't notice that Flip Phillip's car just ahead of her had stopped. She rear-ended Flip, causing him whiplash. Which of the following is true?

A)Betty owed Flip a duty of care.
B)It was reasonably foreseeable that another driver might be injured by Betty if she was careless.
C)Betty was not careless as many drivers talk on cell phones as they drive.
D)Flip was contributorily negligent because he should have anticipated that Betty might hit him when he saw her talking on her cell phone.
E)Both A and B

Question 18

Donoghue v. Stevenson is significant because it established which of the following principles?

A)The criteria for contributory negligence
B)The reasonable person test
C)The remoteness of damage defence
D)The reasonable foreseeability test
E)The criteria for voluntary assumption of risk

Question 19

Under the law, which of the following persons have an obligation to take reasonable care to ensure that a property is safe?

A)the owner
B)the occupier
C)the provincial government
D)the municipality
E)the owner's real estate agent

Question 20

When a person buys a sweater from an unknown manufacturer and gives it to a friend as a present and the friend is injured because the sweater contains a poisonous dye?

A)The purchaser may be liable to the friend in contract.
B)The manufacturer may be liable to the friend in contract.
C)The purchaser may be liable to the friend in tort.
D)The manufacturer may be liable to the friend in tort.
E)Both C and D.

Question 21

Which of the following must be present in order for a business to successfully rely on the defence of voluntary assumption of risk?

A)the exact nature of the risk must be clear to the customer
B)the activity being engaged in by the customer must not be high risk
C)the customer must have paid adequate consideration for participating in the activity
D)the risk must be one which other customers have been willing to assume
E)All of the above

Question 22

In an effort to help one of her corporate customers avoid paying a large amount for income tax, Jenny an accountant provided an inaccurate financial statement to the company which later submitted it in support of its tax return. The fraud was discovered by Revenue Canada. Which of the following statements is correct?

A)Jenny may be held liable for up to 50% of the amount of the fraud.
B)Jenny may be held liable for up to 75% of the amount of the fraud
C)Jenny may be held liable for up to 100% of the amount of the fraud
D)Jenny may be held liable for up to 25% of the amount of the fraud
E)Jenny may be held liable for up to 40% of the amount of the fraud

Question 23

Darius was driving his car negligently and collided with Georgette. Darius was not going that fast, and normally, the injuries suffered by Georgette would not have been that severe. Unfortunately, she suffers from a progressive nerve disease which is aggravated by the accident. Which of the following is TRUE?

A)Darius is not responsible for the additional damages attributed to Georgette's condition. They were reasonably foreseeable.
B)Darius is responsible for some of the additional damages attributable to Georgette's condition - namely, the extent to which the accident worsened her condition.
C)Darius is responsible for all for the additional damages attributed to Georgette's condition.
D)This case is an illustration of the "crumbling skull plaintiff."
E)Both B and D.

Question 24

Joe and Peter goes to the local sports bar Goals to watch the hockey game on the big screen. Their waiter Lisa served Joe 8 beers but Peter drank Coke all night long. Lisa asked who was driving home and Peter said he would be. When they left Joe drove though and he went through a red light hitting Gail's car. Gail did not have her seat belt on and was thrown from her car and suffered serious injuries. Peter was also injured in the accident too. Which of the following statements is FALSE?

A)Joe is liable for negligence
B)Gail can be awarded pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages
C)Goals and Lisa are partially liable for Gail's injuries
D)Gail's injuries will be reduced due to contributory negligence
E)If the court rules that Peter voluntarily assumed the risk he will not be able to successfully sue Joe

Question 25

With respect to the legal principles concerning a manufacturer's duty to warn of dangers associated with its product, which of the following statements is TRUE?

A)Warnings about dangers associated with the product must be reasonably communicated
B)Warnings need not be given if dangers are discovered after the product has been sold and distributed
C)Warnings must only be printed if there have been previous injuries
D)Warnings must be printed on the label and describe the specific danger
E)A and D

Question 26

What is the justification for the courts restricting the scope of the duty of care in some instances of claims against professionals for damages for negligence?

A)The need to protect professionals from the consequences of their negligent actions
B)The need to ensure that professionals can obtain and maintain adequate insurance coverage
C)The need to ensure that the justice system functions effectively
D)The need to avoid potentially liability on the part of the professional to an unlimited number of persons
E)All of the above

Question 27

Which of the following statements is TRUE with respect to companies that supplies products to consumers?

A)They can only be held partly responsible for damages caused to consumers arising from the use of their products.
B)Their standard of care is that of a reasonable manufacturer
C)They can never escape liability for damage caused to a consumer from using their products
D)In the event of injury to a consumer arising from use of the product, the courts will impose a high standard of care on them
E)They will not be liable to a consumer for damage arising from use of their products if there is a warning label on the product

Question 28

Which of the following statements about the defence of voluntary assumption of risk is TRUE?

A)It is not necessary for the plaintiff to clearly understand the nature of the risk involved.
B)Sports participants have consented to any injuries might occur while playing the sport.
C)The assumption of risk can only be implied through conduct.
D)The assumption of risk can be actual or implied by conduct.
E)It results in a reduction of the damages that the plaintiff will receive.

Question 29

Nikolaus was driving his car negligently and collided with Felice. Nikolaus was not going that fast, and normally, the injuries suffered by Felice would not have been that severe. Unfortunately, she suffers from a calcium deficiency she is being treat for, with the result that she suffered multiple fractures. Which of the following is TRUE?

A)Nikolaus is not responsible for the additional damages attributable to Felice's condition. They were not reasonably foreseeable.
B)Nikolaus is not responsible for the additional damages attributable to Felice's condition. She was aware of her condition and assumed the risk of additional damages in the event of a motor vehicle accident.
C)Nikolaus is responsible for the additional damages attributable to Felice's condition. "You take your victim as you find her."
D)They are each 50% responsible for Felice's injuries
E)Felice is 25% liable for her own injuries due to contributory negligence

Question 30

Gaston bought a toaster made by Robinson Electric Co. One day while using the toaster, it exploded causing him to sustain serious injury. The accident occurred either as a result of faulty parts supplied by the parts manufacturer, negligent assembly by the toaster manufacturer or negligent handling by the local retailer. Gaston sued Robinson Electric, the parts manufacturer and the local retailer for his injuries. Which of the following statements is TRUE?

A)There will be a presumption that the manufacturer is responsible for the injuries caused.
B)Gaston has to prove specifically which of the three companies was responsible for the defect causing his injuries.
C)If each of the three defendant are unable to prove which one of them was responsible for the accident, none of them can be held liable.
D)If each of the three defendants are unable to prove which one of them was responsible for the accident, they may all be held equally liable.
E)Gaston can sue only the manufacturer of the toaster.

Question 31

Trang Phan ran a stop sign and collided with Joan Lee's car, injuring her. Joan was not paying attention at the time; she was leaning down to change her radio station. If she had been watching, she could have stopped and reduced the damage. In an action by Joan against Trang, Trang can raise Joan's carelessness in his defence. What is the technical name for this defence?

A)assumption of risk.
B)contributory negligence
C)partial defence
D)complete defence
E)volenti no fit injuria

Question 32

Which of the following is the best synonym for fiduciary duty?

A)competency
B)good faith
C)financial knowledge
D)fiscal policy
E)earnest effort

Question 33

In which of the following situations could the defence of voluntary assumption of risk apply?

A)A spectator injured by a baseball hit into the stands while attending a baseball game.
B)A pedestrian hit by a car while crossing a road not at an intersection.
C)A passenger whose friend gives him a drive home after they have spent the evening drinking at the pub together.
D)Both A and C
E)All of the above.

Question 34

In an effort to help one of her corporate customers avoid paying a large amount for income tax, Jenny an accountant helped the company to prepare a fraudulent tax return. The fraud was discovered by Revenue Canada. Which of the following statements is TRUE?

A)Jenny may be held liable for up to 75% of the gross amount of the fraud
B)Jenny may be held liable for up to 100% of the gross amount of the fraud
C)Jenny may be held liable for up to 25% of the gross amount of the fraud
D)Jenny may be held liable for up to 50% of the gross amount of the fraud.
E)Jenny may be held liable for up to 40% of the gross amount of the fraud

Question 35

Which of the following cannot be used as a defence in a claim based upon product liability principles?

A)Contributory negligence
B)Voluntary assumption of risk
C)Lack of causation
D)Both A and B
E)All of the above can be used

Question 36

Juniper Ltd, a manufacturer of jams and jellies, has been sued by Trevor who alleges that he consumed worms in one of their products and which made him severely ill. Juniper sells all of its products through an independent regional distributor Jellyco. Juniper's manufacturing process entails bottling the jams and jellies when the mixtures are at boiling temperatures and thereafter immediately sealing the containers. It therefore believes that it is impossible that worms could have been in its product when it left the manufacturing plant. Which of the following is its best defence to Trevor's claim?

A)That it did not cause the defect in the product
B)That it does not know how the defect occurred
C)That Jellyco must have caused the defect
D)That Trevor did not really suffer an injury
E)That it owed no duty of care to Trevor

Question 37

Shayne Dorson checked Stephen Rychus in a hockey game while Stephen was going for the puck. Stephen fell and broke his ankle. Stephen sues Shayne. Which of the following is Shayne's best defence?

A)Contributory negligence.
B)Voluntary assumption of risk
C)Provocation
D)None of the above
E)All of the above

Question 38

At what stage must a clause in a contract containing a waiver be brought to the attention of a customer?

A)At the time a claim for damages is made
B)At the time when injury falling within the scope of the waiver occurs
C)At the time the agreement is made
D)Within 10 days of making the agreement
E)Within 5 days of making the agreement

Question 39

Which of the following is NOT a basis for bringing an action for damages based on product liability principles?

A)negligent design
B)defects in the manufacturing process
C)inadequate warning on the product
D)unforeseen risks
E)All of the above can be the basis for bringing a claim

Question 40

If an advisor owes a fiduciary duty to a client, this means that

A)there is a higher standard of competence demanded of the advisor.
B)the advisor must put the client's interests above her own interests.
C)the advisor owed a duty not to be negligent respecting work done for the client.
D)both A and C
E)all of the above

Question 41

Darryl Wild enters a motorcycle race. As a condition of entering, he signs a waiver releasing the race organizers for any claims arising from injury to his person however caused, including as a result of negligence by them or their agents. During the race, a flag man goes too far out onto the course and when Darryl attempts to avoid him, he loses control and crashes. Darryl sues the organizers for his injuries. Which of the following is TRUE?

A)Motorcycle racing is a high risk activity.
B)Darryl could have been in no doubt as to the existence and extent of the waiver.
C)The courts generally uphold exemption clauses in actions brought by participants against high risk activities.
D)Both A and B
E)All of the above.

Question 42

A paralegal firm is retained on its standard hourly rate to conduct a Small Claims Court action for a business. Which of the following is a source of legal obligation owed by the paralegal firm to its client?

A)Contract
B)Tort
C)Fiduciary duty
D)Both A and B
E)All of the above

Question 43

Kofi Nkrumah ran a restaurant booth at a beach during the summer. He sold two cans of Zowie Cola to Iona Green, who gave one to her boyfriend, Dennis Vigay. When Dennis was almost finished drinking, he saw the partly decayed body of a mouse at the bottom of the can. He became violently ill. Which of the following is FALSE?

A)Dennis can successfully sue Zowie and Kofi for negligence
B)Kofi is not liable in contract to Dennis because he sold the pop to Iona.
C)Kofi owed a duty of care to Dennis but did not breach it, since he could have no idea there was a mouse in the can.
D)Dennis can sue Zowie in a products liability action.
E)Ioan is not liable for Dennis's injuries

Question 44

Alberto was attending a concert at Parker Hall. During the concert Alberto had to leave his seat to go to the washroom. There was some construction going on in the hallway outside the bathroom, so the management had cordoned the area with pylons and yellow tape, and had put up a sign warning patrons to stay out (and pointing to the location of the nearest available bathroom). Alberto was very much in a hurry to use the bathroom, so he stepped under the tape, tripped on a loose tile, and injured himself. He sued Parker Hall for negligence. Which of the following is TRUE?

A)The defendants complied with the standard of care.
B)Alberto voluntarily assumed the risk of an accident by his actions.
C)The defendants took such care as was reasonable in the circumstances to make the premises reasonably safe.
D)Both A and C
E)All of the above

Question 45

Auditors of a public company may face unlimited liability to investors who may be a worldwide class of potential plaintiffs. What do the courts do to limit such responsibility in negligence?

A)They limit damages to the cost of the audit fees.
B)They make auditors liable only for gross negligence
C)They limit the scope of duty.
D)They make it very difficult to prove causation.
E)None of the above

Question 46

Which of the following is TRUE?

A)An advisor can only be sued in contract.
B)An advisor can only be sued in tort.
C)An advisor can only be sued for breach of fiduciary duty.
D)An advisor can be sued in both tort and contract.
E)An advisor can be sued in tort, in contract, and for breach of fiduciary duty.

Question 47

Acme Inc. owns a store that it rents to Beta Inc. which does not need the space yet so it sublets to Cartunes Inc. which operates a car radio sale business in it. Mary slips on the floor while buying a radio and breaks her hip. The floor was wet because of negligence. Who of the following is liable to Mary on the above facts?

A)Acme Inc., the owner
B)Beta Inc., the tenant
C)Cartunes Inc, the subtenant
D)All of the above jointly
E)Both B and C

Question 48

Andy Kim was quietly having a beer one night at Casey's Tavern when he was suddenly and without warning attacked by Red Nekk, who was clearly intoxicated. Red is somewhat notorious around Casey's: he gets thrown out about once a week for starting fights and knows that. On other occasions when he's been there, there have been two bouncers, so he's felt safe. Unfortunately, they were both breaking up another fight when he was suckered by Red. Andy suffered cuts and bruises as a result of this incident, and he sues Casey's for negligence. Which of the following is TRUE?

A)The defendant had no duty to protect Andy from attack by its patrons.
B)Andy voluntarily assumed the risk of an assault when he attended a place like Casey's.
C)The defendant took reasonable care to protect its patrons by employing two bouncers.
D)The defendant should have barred Red from the premises, given his history.
E)There was nothing the defendant could have done in the circumstances to have protected Andy from an attack.

Question 49

Shirley Hurley, a cautious and careful woman, slipped on a wet patch in the produce department of Honest Al's grocery store. No one knows how the patch got there and how long it had been there before Shirley slipped. Al has a policy that the floors of the produce department are to be checked every hour for wetness and other unsafe conditions. There is reliable evidence that the policy was being followed on the day in question. Shirley sues for damages for the injuries she suffered from the fall. Which of the following is TRUE?

A)The defendants complied with the standard of care.
B)The principle of res ipsa loquitur applies in these circumstances.
C)The defendant took such care as well reasonable in the circumstances to make the premises reasonably safe.
D)The principle of absolute liability applies.
E)Both A and C

Question 50

Alberto was attending a concert at Parker Hall. During the concert Alberto had leave his seat to go to the washroom. There was some construction going on in the hallway outside the washroom, and Alberto tripped on a loose tile, injuring himself. Because it was fairly dark, he didn't see the sign warning patrons to watch their step. Alberto sues Parker Hall for negligence. Which of the following is TRUE?

A)The defendants complied with the standard of care by warning patrons of the danger.
B)Alberto voluntarily assumed the risk of an accident by going to the bathroom in the dark.
C)The premises were not reasonably in safe in the circumstances.
D)The defendants did not take reasonable care to make the premises safe
E)Both C and D.

Question 51

In Hercules Managements v. Ernst & Young the court decided that:

A)The defendant did not breach the standard of care.
B)There was no liability because the claim was for pure economic loss.
C)There was no special or proximate relationship between the parties.
D)It was not reasonable for the plaintiffs to have relied on the financial statements in the circumstances.
E)It would limit the scope of the duty of care of accountants due to fears of unlimited liability

Question 52

The Wonder Co. manufactures vapourizers. The cap of the Model 400 can be easily removed, and if this is done when the machine is on, the escape of steam can burn a person. For that reason, the company included several warnings in the packaging accompanying the vapourizer, and even had a large and explicit warning right on the machine. Wonder is no longer making the Model 400, and the Model 500 has a safety lock that prevents children from removing the cap. The cost to Wonder of the cap was about 50 cents. The Hendersons' five-year-old removed the cap of the Model 400 vapourizer in his room and was severely burned. The Hendersons sue Wonder. Which of the following is FALSE?

A)The defendants satisfied the duty to warn. It is not liable.
B)The defendant knew of the dangers of the Model 400 and should have recalled those on the market.
C)The defendant was guilty of negligent design.
D)Since it was not prohibitively expensive to make a safer product, the defendant should have done so.
E)Both A and D

Question 53

Tommy Nolis is driving a delivery truck for The Bay when he collides with Faye Chu. As it happens, Faye is also an employee of The Bay, although this was her day off. The accident is Tommy's fault. In fact, he was driving quite recklessly and was impaired. Can Faye sue The Bay for her damages?

A)No. Tommy was not acting I the scope of his employment because he was drinking on the job.
B)No. An employer cannot be held responsible for the crimes of its employees.
C)Yes. An employer is vicariously liable for torts committed by its employees in the course of their employment.
D)No Faye is caught by the co-employee rule.
E)Both A and B

Question 54

Salvatore Accardo purchased a microwave oven from an electronics store. The oven was manufactured by Micro Electronics from components supplied by other companies. Salvatore plugged it in, popped in a pizza to reheat, and the microwave exploded. It seems likely that the cause was a defect in the wiring, which was manufactured by a company called Wires Inc. Salvatore sues Micro. Which of the following is TRUE?

A)Once Salvatore shows that the microwave exploded, there would be at least an evidentiary burden on Micro to show that its negligence was not the cause.
B)Micro is liable to Salvatore for Wire's negligence, although it could claim indemnity from Wires
C)If Wires is joined as a party to this action, it cannot be held liable to Salvatore.
D)Both A and B
E)All of the above

Question 55

The grounds for a products liability claim are:

A)Negligent design.
B)Defects in the manufacturing process.
C)Breach of the duty to warn
D)Both A and C
E)All of the above

Question 56

The test for scope of duty for the negligent use of words (negligent misstatement)is?

A)Special relationship.
B)Reasonable foreseeability
C)Reasonable person
D)Fiduciary duty
E)Voluntary assumption of risk

Question 57

Which of the following statements about causation in torts is TRUE?

A)There can be only one legal cause of an accident
B)There can be more than one legal cause of an accident
C)There is liability for any cause that materially contributes to an accident.
D)There is liability only for the last or proximate cause in a chain of events.
E)Both B and C

Question 58

Which of the following statements about damages in tort is TRUE?

A)Any damages which are reasonably foreseeable are recoverable.
B)Any damages which are the natural consequences of the tortuous conduct are recoverable.
C)The recoverability of damages is limited by the concept of remoteness.
D)Both A and C
E)All of the above

Question 59

Which of the following is TRUE?

A)Business that sell liquor to a person who is already intoxicated may be liable to strangers who are injured after that person leaves the premises.
B)Business that sell liquor to a person who is already intoxicated may be liable to that person if he is injured on the premises.
C)Business that sell liquor to a person who is already intoxicated may be liable to that person if he is injured after leaving the premises.
D)Both A and B
E)All of the above

Question 60

Which of the following is required to establish negligence?

A)It was reasonably foreseeable that the plaintiff would be injured by the defendant's act.
B)The plaintiff failed to do what a reasonable person would have done in the circumstances.
C)The failure to act reasonably caused the plaintiff's injury.
D)The defendant failed to do what a reasonable person would have done under the circumstances.
E)A,C and D

Question 61

Dalton's neighbour, Rosemary, was a retired lawyer who handled all her own investments in the stock market. Rosemary was very successful with her investment decisions and would sometimes tell Dalton the various shares that she was considering purchasing if they happened to meet outside their homes. Dalton often followed up on his conversations with Rosemary, and would tell her how happy he was with the results in the shares they had talked about. One day Rosemary seemed more than usually enthusiastic about a particular share offering and Dalton decided to invest a large amount of his retirement money in it. Needless to say, after a small rise in price the value of the shares went south and Dalton lost $35,000. Dalton is very angry and wants to sue Rosemary for her financial advice, which of the following is TRUE?

A)Dalton would be as he was a non-client of whom Rosemary had actual knowledge at the time the advice was given.
B)Dalton will not be successful as it was not reasonably foreseeable that he would rely on Rosemary's information.
C)Dalton would not be successful as the advice was not given in a business context.
D)Dalton would be successful because it was reasonable for him to rely on Rosemary's advice in the circumstances
E)Dalton would be successful because Rosemary knew he sometimes relied on her information.

Question 62

Negligence is called an unintentional tort because the person doing the action often does not know the victim.

Question 63

A bar owner, has an obligation to ensure that all patrons are reasonably safe from the actions from drunken customers.

Question 64

Under the principle of voluntary assumption of risk, all persons who go to a monster
truck rally will be presumed to have accepted all the risks of injury.

Question 65

An occupier of property owes no duty to trespassers who come on their property.

Question 66

An occupier of property may be able to escape liability for injuries caused to a person lawfully
on the property if he or she had put up a sign warning of the dangers on the property.

Question 67

Which of the following is a breach of fiduciary duty?

A)A broker recommends to his client that he buy shares of a company without telling the client that he (the broker)is being paid by the company to promote it.
B)A broker recommends to his client that he buy shares of a company without telling the client that he (the broker)owns shares in that company.
C)A broker recommends to his client that he use a particular lending institution to finance the purchase without telling the client that he (the broker)gets referrals from the institution in return.
D)Both A and B
E)All of the above
TRUE/FALSE QUESTIONS

Question 68

A manufacturer has no duty to warn consumers of any dangers associated with its
product if these dangers are discovered after the product has been sold and distributed.

Question 69

Arthur Walker, an accountant, prepared financial statements for Globalus Ltd., a public company whose shares traded on the stock exchange. A shareholder of Antimony Ltd, a company which was considering taking over Globalus, was reading the document on the subway and forgot it. Frank Nelson picked the statements up and bought shares in the company based on what he had read. Walker had made a careless mistake and Frank's investment turned out to be worthless. Which of the following is TRUE?
A)Walker owed a duty of care to Antimony respecting investment decisions.

A)Walker owed a duty of care to Globalus.
B)Walker owed a duty of care to Frank.
C)Both A and C
D)Both B and C

Question 70

A bar owner maybe liable to a customer if he gets drunk on the premises and upon
leaving, walks into the path of an oncoming vehicle thereby sustaining personal injuries.

Question 71

Professionals may not always be liable in negligence to all persons who have suffered a loss
as a result of their negligent actions.

Question 72

A manufacturer of products is only liable for injury arising from defects in the products to those
persons which whom it has a contract for the sale of the products.

Question 73

Steven Wong was an ace financial advisor. He placed millions of dollars on behalf of his clients into certain debentures of Tippett Holdings Ltd. He did not inform his clients that he received hundreds of thousands in commissions from Tippett for obtaining all this investment. On the other hand, all of his clients made money on their Tippett holdings. Can any of his clients sue Wong?

A)No. They have not suffered any financial loss
B)No. Wong has not given negligent professional advice
C)No. Wong has not placed his own interests above those of his clients
D)Yes. Wong has committed a breach of fiduciary duty
E)Both A and B

Question 74

The imposition of a fiduciary duty on a professional, means that the professional must display
additional skill in dealing with the business affairs of the persons for whose benefit the duty has been imposed.

Question 75

In the law of negligence you owe a duty of care to anyone you should reasonably foresee will be affected by your actions.

Question 76

The "but for" test is used in negligence law to establish

A)causation
B)foreseeability
C)remoteness of damages
D)standard of care
E)reasonable person standards

Question 77

Which of the following is TRUE?

A)Auditors give opinions as to whether financial statements have been prepared according to standard accounting practice.
B)Auditors of a company's financial statements are from an outside accounting firm.
C)Auditors owe a responsibility only to those individuals whom it is reasonably foreseeable would be investors in the company.
D)Both A and B
E)Both A and C

Question 78

A plaintiff who has been seriously injured in a motor vehicle accident partly due to failure
to wear his seatbelt, will be able to recover full damages for negligence because 'you take your victim as you find him".

Question 79

Arthur Walker, an accountant, prepared financial statements for Globalus Ltd., a public company whose shares traded on the stock exchange. A shareholder of Globalus was reading the document on the subway and forgot it. Frank Nelson picked the statements up and bought shares in the company based on what he had read. Walker had made a careless mistake and Frank's investment turned out to be worthless. Which of the following is TRUE?

A)Walker does not owe a duty of care to Frank in tort law.
B)Walker does owe a duty of care to frank in tort law.
C)The financial statements are words and there is no right to sue based on the careless use of words.
D)Walker is liable to Frank because it was reasonably foreseeable that someone might pick up a copy of the financial statements.
E)Frank can only sue the Globalus shareholder if he can find that person

Question 80

Brock Brocklin, a stockbroker, invited Tom Thomson, a long-term client, to lunch to sell some stocks. Tom brought a friend, Clive Clernons. Brock mistakenly recommended Morden Plastics as being a good investment. The three martinis clouded his memory: the company name should have been Borden Plastics. Tom didn't buy Morden Plastics, but Clive did and lost heavily. Now Clive wants to sue Brock for negligence advice. Which of the following is true?

A)There is no right to sue for negligent use of words.
B)There was no contract between Brock and Clive so Clive has no legal basis to sue.
C)Clive will have to establish that he was in the scope of duty owed by Brock to win his action.
D)Clive will only have to prove that Brock was careless to win his action.
E)Clive should sue Tom for breach of fiduciary duty.