Problem Question Cam Law Test help please!
If anyone could take a few minutes to give me advice I would be very grateful.
Having no background knowledge in law (it is apparently not needed for the CLT), how would you set out an answer to this question?, Bearing in mind that it would be expected to be done in around 30mins.
Consider the application of the Act to each of the following circumstance. In doing so, you can assume that a contract exists where two (or more) parties enter into an agreement in which they intend to be legally bound, and that a contract need not be in writing.
ACT:
Section 1
(1) A person who is not a party to a contract (a “third party”) may in his own right enforce a term of the contract if—
(a) the contract expressly provides that he may, or
(b) subject to subsection (2), the term purports to confer a benefit on him.
(2) Subsection (1)(b) does not apply if on a proper construction of the contract it appears that the parties did not intend the term to be enforceable by the third party.
(3) The third party must be expressly identified in the contract by name, as a member of a class or as answering a particular description but need not be in existence when the contract is entered into.
Section 2
(1) Where a third party has a right under section 1 to enforce a term of the contract, the parties to the contract may not, by agreement, cancel the contract, or vary it in such a way as to extinguish or alter his entitlement under that right, without his consent if—
(a) …;
(b) the promisor is aware that the third party has relied on the term, or
(c) the promisor can reasonably be expected to have foreseen that the third party would rely on the term and the third party has in fact relied on it.
CIRCUMSTANCES:
ii. On Mr and Mrs C’s marriage, their wealthy relative B buys an expensive 3 piece suite as a wedding gift from A Ltd, a well known department store. B makes it clear when purchasing the 3 piece suite that it is a gift for friends. The contract includes a term to the effect that the goods are of satisfactory quality. After 2 weeks of wear the fabric on the suite wears thin and frays, and after 3 weeks, two castors collapse. Can Mr and Mrs C sue A Ltd under the Act? Give reasons for your answer.
iii. X promises Y to pay Z £500 and Z, on hearing of this and because of it, immediately pays some outstanding bills. Before any money is handed over to Z, X and Y change their mind and agree to cancel their contract. Can Z sue X under the Act? Give reasons for your answer
Any advice is welcome, but if anyone can provide a set out/the fameworks of how the answer should look like that would be great
Thank you!
Having no background knowledge in law (it is apparently not needed for the CLT), how would you set out an answer to this question?, Bearing in mind that it would be expected to be done in around 30mins.
Consider the application of the Act to each of the following circumstance. In doing so, you can assume that a contract exists where two (or more) parties enter into an agreement in which they intend to be legally bound, and that a contract need not be in writing.
ACT:
Section 1
(1) A person who is not a party to a contract (a “third party”) may in his own right enforce a term of the contract if—
(a) the contract expressly provides that he may, or
(b) subject to subsection (2), the term purports to confer a benefit on him.
(2) Subsection (1)(b) does not apply if on a proper construction of the contract it appears that the parties did not intend the term to be enforceable by the third party.
(3) The third party must be expressly identified in the contract by name, as a member of a class or as answering a particular description but need not be in existence when the contract is entered into.
Section 2
(1) Where a third party has a right under section 1 to enforce a term of the contract, the parties to the contract may not, by agreement, cancel the contract, or vary it in such a way as to extinguish or alter his entitlement under that right, without his consent if—
(a) …;
(b) the promisor is aware that the third party has relied on the term, or
(c) the promisor can reasonably be expected to have foreseen that the third party would rely on the term and the third party has in fact relied on it.
CIRCUMSTANCES:
ii. On Mr and Mrs C’s marriage, their wealthy relative B buys an expensive 3 piece suite as a wedding gift from A Ltd, a well known department store. B makes it clear when purchasing the 3 piece suite that it is a gift for friends. The contract includes a term to the effect that the goods are of satisfactory quality. After 2 weeks of wear the fabric on the suite wears thin and frays, and after 3 weeks, two castors collapse. Can Mr and Mrs C sue A Ltd under the Act? Give reasons for your answer.
iii. X promises Y to pay Z £500 and Z, on hearing of this and because of it, immediately pays some outstanding bills. Before any money is handed over to Z, X and Y change their mind and agree to cancel their contract. Can Z sue X under the Act? Give reasons for your answer
Any advice is welcome, but if anyone can provide a set out/the fameworks of how the answer should look like that would be great
Thank you!
If im posting in the wrong place can someone correct me/direct me to where best to post it 
Thank you
Thank you
Original post by peaceandempathy
If im posting in the wrong place can someone correct me/direct me to where best to post it
Thank you
Thank you
IIRC, the CLT is designed to test how you think, reason and write. If you're stuck on a general approach, ask in the Cambridge forum, on the law thread. Users such as Tortious, Doughnuts!!, TimmonaPortella and Cast.Iron may be able to help you (all have done the CLT and study at Cambridge. I study at Cambridge but did the LNAT so cannot give much, if any, advice). However, asking currently studying law students specific questions will not help you much. Not only will this question not be replicated in your actual CLT (I assume), we will probably be tempted to give you the legal answer. The test is designed to see how YOU reason, not how people who already study law do so.
(edited 12 years ago)
Original post by gethsemane342
IIRC, the CLT is designed to test how you think, reason and write. If you're stuck on a general approach, ask in the Cambridge forum, on the law thread. Users such as Tortious, Doughnuts!!, TimmonaPortella and Cast.Iron may be able to help you (all have done the CLT and study at Cambridge. I study at Cambridge but did the LNAT so cannot give much, if any, advice). However, asking currently studying law students specific questions will not help you much. Not only will this question not be replicated in your actual CLT (I assume), we will probably be tempted to give you the legal answer. The test is designed to see how YOU reason, not how people who already study law do so.
Spot on.
Have a go yourself, then other users may report back and give their views.
I don't mean to be harsh, but maybe you're not cut for Cambridge if you're finding this difficult. It seems quite basic once you get to grips with what the Act is actually saying. Just read the act slowly twice and then apply it the case in question. Your answer should see you taking a stance, for example you could write Under the Act specified above Z can sue X and you would then quote the relevant part of the act and elaborate till you can do nomore.
Original post by Tsunami2011
I don't mean to be harsh, but maybe you're not cut for Cambridge if you're finding this difficult. It seems quite basic once you get to grips with what the Act is actually saying. Just read the act slowly twice and then apply it the case in question. Your answer should see you taking a stance, for example you could write Under the Act specified above Z can sue X and you would then quote the relevant part of the act and elaborate till you can do nomore.
I don't agree with this. The question here would be a realistic 2nd year end of year exam question at Cambridge and it's mean to push you to your limits.
Original post by The West Wing
I don't agree with this. The question here would be a realistic 2nd year end of year exam question at Cambridge and it's mean to push you to your limits.
Apologies if I came across as an arrogant so and so then. I've probably got it awfully wrong, but from when I went through it slowly it seems like in the second case Z would be permitted to sue X because of subject to subsection (2), the term purports to confer a benefit on him
Also, the fact that the contract cannot be amended or cancelled if the promisor is aware that the third party has relied on the term, or(c) the promisor can reasonably be expected to have foreseen that the third party would rely on the term and the third party has in fact relied on it. Both these rules seem applicable to the scenerio in question since Z was witness to the formation of the contract and can therefore be assumed to 'rely on the term' I've probably barely touched the surface though?
Since, you've said this is meant to be a 2nd year question, I fear that I've got this terribly wrong.
It definitely isn't a second year question, it's the sample problem question given on the Cambridge Law website in the 'Cambridge Law Test' section:
http://www.law.cam.ac.uk/admissions/cambridge-law-test-problem-questions.php
It is clearly intended that students applying for law with no previous law study can answer this.
http://www.law.cam.ac.uk/admissions/cambridge-law-test-problem-questions.php
It is clearly intended that students applying for law with no previous law study can answer this.
Original post by gethsemane342
IIRC, the CLT is designed to test how you think, reason and write. If you're stuck on a general approach, ask in the Cambridge forum, on the law thread. Users such as Tortious, Doughnuts!!, TimmonaPortella and Cast.Iron may be able to help you (all have done the CLT and study at Cambridge. I study at Cambridge but did the LNAT so cannot give much, if any, advice). However, asking currently studying law students specific questions will not help you much. Not only will this question not be replicated in your actual CLT (I assume), we will probably be tempted to give you the legal answer. The test is designed to see how YOU reason, not how people who already study law do so.
OP had the right idea - she posted this on my profile last night but I didn't get chance to look at it.
Original post by The West Wing
I don't agree with this. The question here would be a realistic 2nd year end of year exam question at Cambridge and it's mean to push you to your limits.
Original post by Forum User
It definitely isn't a second year question, it's the sample problem question given on the Cambridge Law website in the 'Cambridge Law Test' section:
http://www.law.cam.ac.uk/admissions/cambridge-law-test-problem-questions.php
It is clearly intended that students applying for law with no previous law study can answer this.
http://www.law.cam.ac.uk/admissions/cambridge-law-test-problem-questions.php
It is clearly intended that students applying for law with no previous law study can answer this.
I think you might've misunderstood what TWW is saying.
He doesn't mean that this is literally the kind of thing second years are asked; our problem questions are in a different format (often with fictional states such as "Tobleronia" or characters such as "PC Scuff", "Sleaze" and "Bent"....), but the style of the question is the same.
It requires you to identify the central issue, decide wht you think the outcome is based on the authority (in this case the Act) and justify your position, which will inevitably entail you highlighting the weaknesses of the other side's case.
peaceandempathy
...
I didn't have to do a problem question for my CLT since different colleges have adopted different versions of the test. I wouldn't worry too much about something like this coming up because chances are there'll be an essay question as an alternative (although I must stress that I don't know that that's the case).
Also, are you sure that you only get half an hour? I had to answer one essay question in an hour; I'm pretty sure the same would apply to problem questions. I don't want to give you specific advice because it'll affect how you see the problem. However, what I will say is that you need to read the Act, decide which provisions relate to each of the two scenarios, and use the language of the statute to decide whether or not each of the relevant parties can claim. Bear in mind that this may involve value judgements (i.e. relating to "reasonableness") - in such a case, I'd offer an opinion on what you think the finding by the court is likely to be.
I hope this helps; if you post your thoughts here, I'll try and play devil's advocate.
It's one question in an hour according to the website irrespective of whether thats a problem or essay question.
Original post by Forum User
It's one question in an hour according to the website irrespective of whether thats a problem or essay question.
ok cheers
Original post by gethsemane342
IIRC, the CLT is designed to test how you think, reason and write. If you're stuck on a general approach, ask in the Cambridge forum, on the law thread. Users such as Tortious, Doughnuts!!, TimmonaPortella and Cast.Iron may be able to help you (all have done the CLT and study at Cambridge. I study at Cambridge but did the LNAT so cannot give much, if any, advice). However, asking currently studying law students specific questions will not help you much. Not only will this question not be replicated in your actual CLT (I assume), we will probably be tempted to give you the legal answer. The test is designed to see how YOU reason, not how people who already study law do so.
Thanks for the advice, I messaged tortious (i'm not sure as im not familiar with how to use this site) and yes, its more that im stuck on general approach and not really with the reasoning. Basically, what i've done is that i've started with yes/no they can sue and then quoted parts of the act that I think are applicable but I just feel like there must be more to it. Also how on earth do you set out your answer? Surley it cant be how you set out an essay question? For example intro, arguement etc etc, conclusion. Ive just written bullet points but i'm sure they would not be pleased to see that in the actual exam.
Original post by Tortious
OP had the right idea - she posted this on my profile last night but I didn't get chance to look at it.
I think you might've misunderstood what TWW is saying.
He doesn't mean that this is literally the kind of thing second years are asked; our problem questions are in a different format (often with fictional states such as "Tobleronia" or characters such as "PC Scuff", "Sleaze" and "Bent"....), but the style of the question is the same.
It requires you to identify the central issue, decide wht you think the outcome is based on the authority (in this case the Act) and justify your position, which will inevitably entail you highlighting the weaknesses of the other side's case.
I didn't have to do a problem question for my CLT since different colleges have adopted different versions of the test. I wouldn't worry too much about something like this coming up because chances are there'll be an essay question as an alternative (although I must stress that I don't know that that's the case).
Also, are you sure that you only get half an hour? I had to answer one essay question in an hour; I'm pretty sure the same would apply to problem questions. I don't want to give you specific advice because it'll affect how you see the problem. However, what I will say is that you need to read the Act, decide which provisions relate to each of the two scenarios, and use the language of the statute to decide whether or not each of the relevant parties can claim. Bear in mind that this may involve value judgements (i.e. relating to "reasonableness") - in such a case, I'd offer an opinion on what you think the finding by the court is likely to be.
I hope this helps; if you post your thoughts here, I'll try and play devil's advocate.
I think you might've misunderstood what TWW is saying.
He doesn't mean that this is literally the kind of thing second years are asked; our problem questions are in a different format (often with fictional states such as "Tobleronia" or characters such as "PC Scuff", "Sleaze" and "Bent"....), but the style of the question is the same.
It requires you to identify the central issue, decide wht you think the outcome is based on the authority (in this case the Act) and justify your position, which will inevitably entail you highlighting the weaknesses of the other side's case.
I didn't have to do a problem question for my CLT since different colleges have adopted different versions of the test. I wouldn't worry too much about something like this coming up because chances are there'll be an essay question as an alternative (although I must stress that I don't know that that's the case).
Also, are you sure that you only get half an hour? I had to answer one essay question in an hour; I'm pretty sure the same would apply to problem questions. I don't want to give you specific advice because it'll affect how you see the problem. However, what I will say is that you need to read the Act, decide which provisions relate to each of the two scenarios, and use the language of the statute to decide whether or not each of the relevant parties can claim. Bear in mind that this may involve value judgements (i.e. relating to "reasonableness") - in such a case, I'd offer an opinion on what you think the finding by the court is likely to be.
I hope this helps; if you post your thoughts here, I'll try and play devil's advocate.
Do you have any idea if Queen's college does essay/problem/comprehension question for the CLT? I'm quite sure its essay, but I dont want to gamble.
Here's an example of what i've produced for ii) please give any thoughts/corrections, expecially on general approach and set out- as i mentioned to another user, im guessing they dont want the essay question set out i.e intro/arg/conclusion but probably not bullet points either as I have done here. Anyway, any pointers would be most welcome
ii) Yes, because of the following reasons:
1) The contract is between B and Altd. By completing the exchange, both parties implicitly fully agree to the terms as mentioned:
- "the goods are of satisfactory quality"
-"the 3 peice suite...is a gift for friends"
As these terms were made clear before completing the exchange, A ltd can be argued to be aware of a 3rd party involvement.
2) The term "the goods are of satisfactoy quality" means the contract "purports to confer a benefit onto them", "them" being Mr and Mrs C. It also cannot be said that "the parties did not intend the term to be enforcable by the third party" as this was made clear by B in the terms of the contract- the third party is identified as "friends". Mr and Mrs C answers this "particular description" as described by Section 1 susection 3. They are thus "expressly identified in the contract".
Mr and Mrs C therefore has right under section 1 to enforce a term of the contract.
Thanks
I would be grateful if anyone could give me tips on my approach/ reasoning
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Applying to italy with a2 predicted grades
- Law Student Help
- Design technology CAD analysis
- Suggested A levels for Cambridge cs?
- English Student. National University Singapore.
- grading system for a medical degree!
- LNAT feeling vs results
- GCSE grades for cambridge law, can i get in?
- Theft Act 1968 - Criticisms?
- Magdalene Cambridge applicants 2022
- Law at SOAS
- How important is the LNAT score for Cambridge?
- london met mathtest
- [Official] Cambridge Law Applicants 2020
- Free LNAT prep materials
- Entry Requirements
- AQA A Level Law Paper 1 26th May 2023
- I'm a Current Law Student - AMA!
- Oxford Demystified - Law and Spanish Law
- Ranking UK Law Schools
Latest
Trending
Last reply 1 week ago
OCR A-level Law Paper 3 (H418/03) - 12th June 2023 [Exam Chat]Trending
Last reply 1 week ago
OCR A-level Law Paper 3 (H418/03) - 12th June 2023 [Exam Chat]
