Multiple questions: Please circle or highlight the correct answer. Thanks!!

Q1.

Which of the following statements about separation of powers in Australia is incorrect?

a.There is an overlap between the executive and legislative branches

b.The executive is the body that administers the law

c.The legislature is the body that resolves disputes concerning the application of law and polices the law

d.Power is divided between the parliament, the executive, and the judiciary

Q2.

A husband promised his estranged (separated) wife that if she returned to live with him, he would transfer their matrimonial home, which was in his name only,into their joint names.His estranged wife did return home, and in subsequent proceedings sought to enforce her husband's promise.Although both parties had seen a solicitor about the agreement, the husband argued that there was no intention to enter a legal relationship.Was there a binding legal obligation on the husband to transfertheir home into their joint names?

A.No. the parties had not mutually agreed to transfer the home into joint names

B.No. the parties' agreement was simply a domestic arrangement and therefore the parties did not intend for their promises to be legally binding

C.Yes. Although the agreement involved a husband and wife, it was made after their matrimonial relationship had broken down and they had seen a solicitor.

D.Yes. Parties had mutually agreed to transfer the home into joint names

Q3.

Jenny was attending a barbeque in the Mt TamborineReserve one evening with her friends.After consuming a few drinks, she decided to go for a bush walk in the moonlight.She strayed off the walking track and fell off a nearby cliff, sustaining serious spinal injuries as a result.There were no lights or warning signs near the edge of the cliff, which made it difficult to see thedanger.There was no fencing erected near the edge of the cliff to keep people out.The Mt Tamborine Council is responsible for maintaining the Reserve.Jenny wishes to sue the Council for negligence for failing to put up signs, lighting and/or a fence.Will Jenny be successful?

A.No, Jenny will not be successful as there was no factual causation under s11(1) Civil Liability Act 2003 (Qld)

B.Yes, Jenny will be successful because the Council breached its duty of care by failing to warn of a hidden risk

C.No, Jenny will not be successful as the risk of harm was too "farfetched" or "remote"

D.No, Jenny will not be successful because the Council does not owe a duty of care to warn of an obvious risk of harm

Q4.

What was the name of the Chief Justice sitting on the High Court for the decision ofCommercial Bank of Australia v Amadio?

a.French C.J.

b.Dawsaon C.J.

c.Gibbs C.J.

d.Mason C.J.

Q5.

Which of the following is incorrect?

a.A single judge of the High Court must follow the previous decision of another single decision judge of the High Court, if the case is based in similar facts.

b.An inferior court will only need to follow the ratio of a judgment from a superior court if they are in the same jurisdiction and the case is based on similar facts to the case being heard

c.Obiter dictum is persuasive and is not binding

d.Ratio decidendi refers to the reason for the judge's decision, which can create binding precedent in the future

Q6.

Hermione's cat had been missing for a few days.She put up signs around the neighbourhood offering a $100 reward to the person who personally returns her cat to her safely.Ron lives in Hermione's street and notices a cat sitting on his driveway.He recognises the cat as being Hermione's cat and returns it safely to Hermione.On his way home, Ron sees one of the signs put up by Hermione.Can Ron claim the reward?

A. yes because it would be unconscionable for Hermoine to go back on her promise.

B. No because Ron's acceptance must be made in reliance of Hermoine offer.

C. yes because Ron has completed the requirements of the unilateral contract.

D.no because Ron has not given any consideration as he has not suffered any detriment.

Q7.

The principle that an offer may be made to a group of people, or to the world at large was established in which common law case?

A. Commercial bank Australia V Amadio.

B. Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain V boots cash chemist.

C. Waltson Stores v Maher.

D. Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co.

Q8.

Elvis and Priscilla entered the Graceland Hotel in Brisbane. After enquiring as to the availability of a room they paid cash for the penthouse suite for three nights. They had not been to Brisbane previously and did not receive any other information about the conditions of their stay at the time. That night, Priscilla's diamond necklace was stolen from their room. The next morning Elvis received a notice from the Hotel excluding all liability for lost or stolen items. Can the notice legally exclude the Hotel from liability in this situation?

A.The exclusion clause is binding as notice of exclusion clause maybe given at any time during Elvis and Priscilla's stay at the Graceland hotel.

B.The exclusion clause is not binding because of the principles established in Presley v Wagner.

C.the exclusion clause is not binding because notice of the exclusion clause was received after the contract was formed.

D. The exclusion is not binding because it breaches the "four corners rule"

Q9.

The "Parol evidence rule" states that:

A.where there is a fully written contract the courts generally allow any oral evidence to be used by either party which contradicts that written agreement.

B.representation and Pre-contractual statements are unlikely to be a term of the contract unless they are in written.

C.a contract must be in writing as a formal contract.

D.if the contract is it written and appears complete no evidence of previous agreements letters of negotiation or draft agreement would be admissible.

Q10.

one day Helen's Burmese cat, Smokey, became stuck in a tree. mike happened to be passing her property when he heard Helen crying. mike quickly assessed the situation and climbed the tree to rescue Smokey. Helen told mike how thankful she was. she asked if he lived nearby and mike said he had nowhere to live. Helen said that he could live in one of her units for $1 per week for the rest of his life (the normal rental value was about $150 per week). mike immediately agreed and even paid her $1 in advance. as he was about to move in, Helen told him that she had changed her mind. if mike sued Helen for breach of contract, the court would hold that the consideration of $1 was:

a. of some value and therefore there is a contract

b. not adequate and therefore there is no contract

c. a gratuitous promise and therefore there is no contract

d. too vague and therefore there is no contract

Q11.

which of the following is one of the requirements for the operation of the doctrine of frustration?

a. that the intervening event be the fault of one party

b. that it would be unfair to enforce the contract in light of the event

c. that the intervening event be foreseeable

d. that one party would be subject to much inconvenience because of the event

Q12.

Chris offers Tom a lift home in his car. Tom is so busy chatting to Chris that he forgets to fasten his seat belt. during the drive home, Chris carelessly runs a red light and crashes into another car. Tom is injured in the accident, and because he wasn't wearing his seatbelt, his injury was worse than it would have been if he had been wearing a seatbelt. if Tom sues Chris for negligence, which defence is Chris likely to raise?

a. contributory negligence

b. the "neighbour" principle

c. factual causation

d. voluntary assumption of risk

Q13.

Jacob was in a car accident at Logan, Queensland in which he broke both his arms, legs and ankles. In addition to surgery he also required 51 stitches in his foot.He wants to sue the driver (or at least the driver's insurance company) for $80,000 in medical bills and lost work.In which court should he start his civil claim?

a.High Court

b. Queensland district court

c. Queensland Supreme Court

d. Queensland Magistrate's Court

Q14.

Johnny is a famous singer and signs a contract with a theatre company for a season of musical performances.A term of the contract stipulates that Johnnie will be the lead singer.He is the lead singer for two nights, but then on the next three nights he finds that he is sharing the stage with two other singers.Can Johnnie terminate the contract?

A.Johnny cannot terminate the Contract as the term is only a condition breach of which only gives rise to an action for damages.

B.Johnny can terminate the contract as the term is a condition breach of which gives the innocent party the right to terminate the contract and Sue for the damages.

C.Johnny can terminate the contract as the term is a warranty which entitles the innocent party to terminate the contract if it is breached.

D. Johnny can terminate the contract if he can show that the requirement that he is lead singer is essential in nature that he would not have entered into the contract if he was not guaranteed the lead role and that the theatre company was aware of this.

Q15.

Ranger Jack Sparrow from the Queensland Department of Animal Welfare sees a wombat for sale in a pet shop window. The pet shop is owned by William. Ranger Jack charges William under theEndangered Species Act 1901(Cth) which provided the following: "Any person who sells, lends or gives an endangered species to any other person commits an offence."Wombats were defined in the legislation as an endangered species.The matter went to court and the judge decided that William had not breached the Act because Ranger Jack did not purchase the wombat. The Judge most likely relied on which rule in making the decision?

A.The Literal Rule or plain meaning approach

B.Purpose Rule under the Acts interpretation Act

C.Purpose Rule under the Common Law

D.The Golden Rule

Q16

According to Barwick CJinMLC Assurance Co Ltd v Evatt(1967), a defendant giving advice will only owe a duty of care to the plaintiff if four requirements are satisfied.Which of the following is not one of these requirements?

A..it was reasonable in the circumstances for the plaintiff to seek or to accept and rely on the advice.

B.the defendant realised or should've realised that the plaintiff intended to act on the advice.

C.the plaintiff Pete the defendant for the advice.

D. the defendant realised or should have realised that the plaintiff trusted them to give information which the plaintiff believed the defendant possess which they had access.

Q17.

Renee agreed to buy Margaret's VW golf (car) for $5,000, with settlement occurring at 5pm on Tuesday. at the last-minute Renee refused to buy the car resulting in a breach of contract. however, Margaret was able to sell the car for the same price to Rachel an hour later. Margaret has suffered no loss or damage because of Renee's breach of contract but wants to take legal action against her anyway, because of lost time. if a court decides to award damages, which type of damages would most likely be awarded?

a.Nominal damages

b.Ordinary damages

c.Specific performance

d.Exemplary damages

Q18.

which of the following statements best sums up the 'purpose approach' to statutory interpretation as set out in s15aa of the acts interpretation act 1901 (cth)?

a.legislation should be interpreted in a way that promotes the purpose underlying the act.

b.the words of an act must be given their grammatical and ordinary meanings, in order to avoid absurdity or inconsistency.

c.a court must have a clear purpose when interpreting legislation.

d. legislation must be interpreted with a clear purpose.

Q19.

Which of the following statements is not correct?

A. The tort of negligence will only provide a remedy where a duty of care is owed.

B. the tort of negligence provide compensation in any case where a person suffers personal injury or property damage.

C. the tort of negligence provide compensation in cases where damage suffered by a person because of another failure's to take reasonable care and damages is not too remote.

Q20.

Which of the following is not a recognised duty of care in negligence?

A. The duty owed by a builder to subsequent owners of the building.

B. the duty owed by an ambulance driver to other motorists.

C. the duty owed by an occupier of property to trespassers on the property.

D. the duty owed by a drunk driver of a stolen car to his or her drunk passengers.

Q21.

John owns two gold coloured cars; one is a Rolls Royce and the other is a Porsche.John agrees to sell one of his gold coloured cars to Peter for $100,000.John believes that Peter wants to buy the Rolls Royce for $100,000 but Peter mistakenly thinks he is buying John's Porsche.In this case, there is no contract because of:

a.Common mistake

b.Mutual mistake

c.Unilateral mistake

d.Non est factum