REVISE LOTSSSS you basically need to know mens rea, actus reus and causation really well... and sentencing (range of it) and possibly transferred malice. work on learning the cases!! for the torte... just look at negligence- duty of care, dangerous and breach of duty- as long as you know that off the top off your head u shud be fine. also damages and res ipsa loquitur... track system and probs procedure before trial xx
REVISE LOTSSSS you basically need to know mens rea, actus reus and causation really well... and sentencing (range of it) and possibly transferred malice. work on learning the cases!! for the torte... just look at negligence- duty of care, dangerous and breach of duty- as long as you know that off the top off your head u shud be fine. also damages and res ipsa loquitur... track system and probs procedure before trial xx
Thanks ChilledBean. Have you already sat this exam?
think it went really well, answered all the questions in as much detail as i can
only thing i forgot was the causation in fact, multiple causes (barker v corus and fairchild glenhaven something something) and intervening acts only remembered the barnett v chelsea one so i guess it's ok!
thought the case studies were completely stupid though.
Thought the first two questions on criminal and contract were great, hopefully done well. The contract case study was just ridiculous, never seen one like that - especially as there are no acceptance cases for emails. Could go either way i think.
My law teacher said they were getting rid of a question but I thought they'd just merge the last two for each section - I think I might have done ok in the criminal section but arghhh damages 8 marks up from 5 :/
In one of the criminal scenarios' i stated that kie might be liable for assault(battery) occasionally actual bodily harm, just wondering if its correct??
lasts years 02 paper may11 paper mark scheme stated that the accused could be liable for battery or ABH.