Question 1: This requires to be proved by a customer who accuses a business of the tort of deceit:
a. The defendant knew that the statement was false or acted recklessly and devoid of regard to the truth.
b. The defendant intended to mislead the plaintiff.
c. The plaintiff suffered a loss because he relied on the statement.
d. All of the above.
Question 2: You insist that a supplier send a rush shipment of parts, thereby leaving the supplier out-of-stock and unable to send parts to the plaintiff with whom it had a prior agreement of sale. You are:
a. Guilty of the tort of intimidation.
b. Guilty of the tort of interference with contractual relations.
c. Guilty of the tort of deceit.
d. Not guilty of anything—that is just the way business works.
Question 3: In an action for negligence, there must be a close and direct connection between the parties. This refers to:
a. Proximity
b. Reasonable foreseeability
c. Policy grounds
d. The neighbour principle
Question 4: Under tort law, a reasonable person is defined as:
a. Someone of average intelligence.
b. Someone of average intelligence who will prudently exercise reasonable care.
c. Someone of average intelligence who will prudently exercise reasonable care considering all of the circumstances.
d. Someone of average intelligence who takes all possible precautions to avoid causing harm to another.
Question 5: Under tort law, a loss may be held to be too remote if:
a. It was not reasonably foreseeable that the careless action could cause the loss.
b. The careless action does not pass the “but-for test.”
c. Too much time has elapsed between the action and the injury suffered.
d. All of the above, leading to a finding that the loss was too remote.