THIS PAPER IS NOT TO BE REMOVED FROM THE EXAMINATION HALLS

UNIVERSITY OF LONDON LA2001 ZB

LLB
DIPLOMA IN THE COMMON LAW
BSc DEGREES WITH LAW

Tort law

Friday 11 May 2018: 10.00 – 13.15

Candidates will have THREE HOURS AND FIFTEEN MINUTES in which to

answer the questions.

Candidates must answer the COMPULSORY question in PART A and THREE

from the EIGHT questions in PART B.

Candidates must answer all parts of a question unless otherwise stated.

Permitted materials
None.

© University of London 2018

UL18/0358
Page 1 of 7
PART A (Redacted - available after the October 2018 examinations

UL18/0358
Page 2 of 7
PART B

Candidates must answer THREE questions in this section.

2. Hasan, the maintenance engineer at Aqua Boat Hire (ABH) has

previously complained to his manager that his excessive workload is
causing him to suffer from stress. Sami hired a speedboat from ABH so
that he could take part in a competition. Soon after the competition
began Sami’s speedboat accelerated to a dangerously high speed, but
an engine malfunction prevented him from reducing the speed and the
boat went out of control. The speedboat flipped over backwards in the
water, throwing Sami out of the boat, and then crashed into Ted’s yacht.
The impact of the crash caused the yacht to burst into flames. Ted was
killed in the accident, but Sami was rescued uninjured from the water.

Consider the principal issues of law which will arise if the parties below
attempt to recover damages for the harm they suffered as a result of the
incident:

(a) Hasan was responsible for maintenance of the speedboat that

Sami hired. Evidence has established that the fault in the
speedboat was caused by the manufacturer’s negligence but
Hasan believes that he may not have been sufficiently careful in
carrying out the safety check before Sami hired the boat. Hasan
has suffered a severe mental breakdown.

(b) Sami is overcome with feelings of guilt and severe depression.

He is unable to work because of this.

(c) Alicia, the estranged wife of Ted, arrived on the scene an hour
after the crash when the rescue operation was taking place. Alicia
immediately recognised that the bright red yacht on fire was Ted’s
but she did not discover that he had been killed in the accident
until four hours later. Alicia suffered a severe trauma and was
unable to return to her job as a solicitor.

(d) Kofi, a member of the lifeboat rescue crew was one of the first to
arrive on the scene. He attempted to rescue Ted but the flames
were so fierce that he could not reach Ted until his colleagues
arrived with firefighting equipment. Kofi is now suffering from
panic attacks and recurring nightmares about the incident.

UL18/0358
Page 3 of 7
3. Jafari was driving along the High Street in his newly purchased ‘Enigma’
car. He was approaching a red traffic light when the brakes on the car
failed and he crashed into a minibus. The manufacturer had sent out an
urgent recall of the ‘Enigma’ car because a fault was discovered in the
braking system. The recall letter to Jafari was posted to an incorrect
address.

Consider the principal issues of law which will arise if the parties below
attempt to recover the losses they suffered arising from the following:

(a) Jafari was injured in the crash.

(b) Before the minibus set off the passengers were reminded to
ensure their seat belts were securely fastened. Harry, a twelve-
year-old boy who had not followed the instruction to fasten his
seat belt, was thrown from his seat and suffered a head injury.

(c) Malcolm, the driver of an oncoming car, swerved to avoid the

accident and crashed into the garden wall of a nearby house.
Jack, the passenger in Malcolm’s car, was seriously injured. At
the time of the accident Malcolm and Jack were fleeing the scene
of a crime where they had snatched two laptop computers from a
shop. Jack is taking an action in negligence against Malcolm (and
also against Malcolm’s insurers).

(d) Estelle, the owner of the garden wall, was not at home at the time
of the accident but her dog, Fido, who was in the garden, became
very distressed with the noise from the crash. Laura, Estelle’s
neighbour, went into the garden to try and calm Fido. As soon as
Laura entered the garden Fido bit her leg. Laura’s injury was
severe and required hospital treatment.

UL18/0358
Page 4 of 7
4. Baba, a freelance journalist, writes a weekly column for the Sporting
Times. Baba had a long standing friendship with Sitric, the newly
appointed Editor of the Sporting Times, but this friendship ended
acrimoniously when Sitric refused to give Baba a permanent job at the
newspaper.

Last month, a fellow journalist provided Baba with a story claiming that
Sitric had accepted a large sum of money to supress a sex scandal
involving Josh, a famous rugby player, who plays for the Saxon
Leopards, from appearing in the Sporting Times. Baba sent details about
the alleged scandal in a confidential email to the Rugby Governing Body
(RGB). A visitor at the RGB’s office read the email on an unattended
computer screen and informed Sitric of Baba’s allegation.

Baba also posted a message on her blog headed: ‘Scandalous sexual

behaviour of the Saxon Leopards’ accompanied with a photo of Josh.
The following day when Baba discovered that the sex scandal story was
a “fake news” untruth she deleted the blog and the photo. However, she
refused to publish an apology to Josh claiming that ‘no harm was done’
because blog posts are not meant to be taken seriously and ‘anything
goes’ on social media.

Advise Sitric, Josh and the Saxons Leopards of any possible claims in
defamation and consider any defences that might be advanced by Baba.

5. Explain how the courts determine if an ordinary defendant’s conduct has

fallen below the standard of care required in negligence and evaluate
the approach to determining breach of duty where an action in
negligence is brought against a professional person.

6. “There is a tendency, which has been remarked upon by many judges,

for phrases like ‘proximate’, ‘fair, just and reasonable’ and ‘assumption
of responsibility’ to be used as slogans rather than practical guides to
whether a duty should exist or not.” Lord Hoffmann, Customs and Excise
Commissioners v Barclays Bank Plc [2006] UKHL 28

Discuss the approach of the courts to determining liability for statements

that cause pure economic loss in the light of this statement.

7. Discuss and evaluate the public policy reasons for the denial of
negligence claims against public bodies.

UL18/0358
Page 5 of 7
8. Kingfisher Gym (KG) engaged Alpine Builders to renovate its gym.
Alpine displayed a large notice outside KG stating: “Danger take care”.

Sam, one of the Alpine electricians, was instructed by his manager to

install the gym’s new running machine. Sam, unfamiliar with installing
this type of equipment, suffered a severe electric shock as he
commenced the work. Sam had forgotten to check installation
instructions before he started.

Nathan, a fitness instructor at KG, suffered head injuries when an

overhead spotlight fell on him from the gym ceiling. The spotlight, fitted
by Alpine, had only two of the four bolts required to secure it in place.

Paul, a KG member, was responding to a work email near the entrance

to the children’s’ play area. In an instant, Eli, his four-year-old son
disappeared. Eli had seen a life-size picture of a character from his
favourite TV show, ‘The Magic Kingdom’, on a door and immediately ran
towards it. When Eli put his hand on the character the door opened.
Thinking it was the entrance to the magic kingdom, Eli went through the
door and fell down a very steep stairwell causing him serious injuries.

A large notice prominently displayed at KG’s reception desk states: “The

Use of these Premises are Restricted to Kingfisher Gym Members Only”.
Mia ignored the sign and sneaked into the gym when the receptionist
was looking elsewhere. When Mia began to use the rowing machine the
belt suddenly snapped and smashed her expensive watch.

Advise KG as to its liability, if any, under the Occupiers’ Liability Acts of

1957 and 1984 for the above incidents.

UL18/0358
Page 6 of 7
9. Eco Ltd has been manufacturing furniture in its factory on the industrial
estate outskirts of Westport village for over thirty years. The factory
operates on a 24-hour basis and accepts deliveries of timber throughout
the day and the night.

Two years ago Mr and Mrs Jones moved into Westport House, the only
residence in close proximity to the estate. Mrs Jones needs a quiet
environment for the daily yoga classes she runs from her home but she
had to cancel her classes because of the noise from the factory. The
noise from the machines during the night keeps Mr and Mrs Jones
awake.

Medical evidence shows that Mr Jones’ increased asthma attacks are

due to invisible particles in the sawdust emanating from Eco’s factory.
The invisible particles have also caused damage to the exotic shrubs
that Mr Jones planted in his garden.

The large trucks coming through Westport village to deliver

consignments of timber to Eco throughout the night cause a loss of sleep
to the villagers of Westport. Westport Lodge Hotel guests are
increasingly posting negative comments on social media about the noise
at night. The negative publicity has led to large scale booking
cancellations and the hotel is now being forced to close.

Eco decided to extend its factory to meet the increased demand for its
furniture. A power blasting operation was required to cut through some
underground rock to dig the foundations. Eco appointed a power blasting
expert to oversee the operation but unexpectedly an explosion occurred
during the process. The stones from the blast smashed windows in the
Jones’ house. Another stone hit Olga, a cyclist passing on the road
outside the factory, causing her an eye injury.

In respect of the above incidents discuss the liability of Eco, if any, in the
tort of nuisance and/or Rylands v Fletcher.

END OF PAPER

UL18/0358
Page 7 of 7