Previous | Start | Next
1.Which one of the following accurately describes the ‘but for&rsquo test in causation?
2.The defendant in Barnett v Chelsea and Kensington HMC (1969) was not liable because:
3.In Chester v Afshar (2004) the doctor was liable because:
4.Which one of the following accurately describes the phrase novus actus interveniens?
5.Which one of the following accurately describes the decision in the case of Sayers v Harlow BC (1958)?
6.Which one of the following represents the amount of compensation received by the claimant in Hotson v East Berkshire HA (1987)?
7.Which one of the following represents why the defendants were successful in the House of Lords in Wisher v Essex AHA (1988)?
8.The case in which the claimants were able to claim compensation successfully for mesothelioma even though they could not demonstrate which of their past employers had negligently exposed them to the asbestos which had triggered their disease was:
9.Which one of the following accurately describes the House of Lords decision in the case of Jolley v Sutton LBC (2000)?
10.Which one of the following accurately demonstrates the application of the '‘thin skull rule’?