For Problem based questions: The formula here is:
Identify. Specify the legal principle or area of law that the question is about.
Explain. State what that principle(s) is (are) and whether there are any exceptions and what defences there may be.
Apply. Apply the law to the particular facts of the question. In other words, analyse the problem set using the relevant legal principles.
Advise. Conclude by advising the person that you have been asked to advise. Always leave this until last.
In each of the following situations, explain the legal position.
a. Rosemary is shopping in her local supermarket when she sees a notice saying ˜special offer’ ˜TV & DVD player combined only Â£9.99′. Rosemary
immediately takes one of the TVs to the check out to purchase it, and the assistant says: ˜I am sorry, a number 9 must have fallen off the notice.
The cost is actually Â£99.99.’ Rosemary insists she has a legal right to purchase it for Â£9.99.
b. Queen’s Bookshop advertises in a local paper a special offer for students, which states that any student purchasing two textbooks will be entitled
to a third one free during the month of September.
Daisy purchases two textbooks and selects a third as her free book. Queen’s Bookshop insists she has to pay for all three books.
The manager tells her that the promotion has ended due to huge popularity. Daisy insists she is entitled to the free book.
c. Fleur borrowed Â£1,000 from James, promising to repay it on December 1st.
On December 1st, James accepted Â£800 in full and nal settlement of the debt, but two days later said he had changed
his mind and asked for the remaining Â£200 to be paid. Explain whether Fleur is legally obliged to pay the additional Â£200.
Would your answer differ if Fleur repaid James Â£800 one month early on November 1st?
Henry is a taxi driver taking two passengers to the airport. He is un t to drive due to having consumed alcohol at lunchtime. He is driving
erratically and loses control of the vehicle, resulting in it overturning and leading to a re starting in the engine compartment.
Advise the following claimants whether they have a valid legal claim in negligence against Henry.
contract. His claim is for the loss of pro t he says he could have made on the contract.
b. Jack is a passing motorist who stops to help get the passengers out of the taxi. Jack is badly burned as a result and is taken to hospital for
specialist treatment. He will not be able to work for at least six months.
c. David, Caroline and Fiona all suffer from post-traumatic stress following the event, and their claim is based on their loss of earnings while
unable to work:
David is a passenger in the taxi.
Caroline is Jack’s mother, who witnessed Jack receiving emergency hospital treatment.
Fiona is Jack’s colleague, who was a passenger in his car and witnessed Jack’s injuries at the scene of the accident.
Gerald is a property developer who has recently purchased a property for development. He has obtained planning permission to convert the building
into 10 retirement ats. He has engaged a reputable rm of builders, Stewart Bros Ltd, as main contractor to carry out the renovations. One month
into the work, Gerald has received two letters of complaint:
Samuel, who is fteen years old, has been gaining entry to the site by climbing over the 8ft-high security fencing surrounding the site.
The rst anyone knew he was doing so was when he fell and broke his arm. The letter threatens court action to obtain damages for personal injuries
and the cost of a new iPhone, because his was damaged beyond repair as a result of his fall.
Angus is the local authority building inspector. He trips over a cable lying across an upper oor and falls down a staircase. He is taken to
hospital with concussion and claims damages for personal injury and loss of income for time off work.
Advise Gerald and Stewart Bros Ltd whether Samuel and Angus have any legal claim under occupiers’ liability.