smiah1
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#1
Hey guys wanted to create a thread for UNIT 2 law exam.
Btw I need help, I don't understand how you apply a scenario to breach of duty, my teacher did not teach us properly so can anyone help me and how would you set the answer out for a breach of duty question, thank you!
0
reply
Puddles the Monkey
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#2
Report 5 years ago
#2
(Original post by smiah1)
Hey guys wanted to create a thread for UNIT 2 law exam.
Btw I need help, I don't understand how you apply a scenario to breach of duty, my teacher did not teach us properly so can anyone help me and how would you set the answer out for a breach of duty question, thank you!
Heya, I'm just going to pop this in the Law forum, as you should be able to get more responses there.

You should check that forum out to see if there's anything useful for you there http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?f=225
0
reply
smiah1
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#3
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#3
(Original post by Puddles the Monkey)
Heya, I'm just going to pop this in the Law forum, as you should be able to get more responses there.

You should check that forum out to see if there's anything useful for you there http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?f=225
thanks.
0
reply
snikutsmullac
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#4
Report 5 years ago
#4
(Original post by smiah1)
Hey guys wanted to create a thread for UNIT 2 law exam.
Btw I need help, I don't understand how you apply a scenario to breach of duty, my teacher did not teach us properly so can anyone help me and how would you set the answer out for a breach of duty question, thank you!
What we was told about breach of duty application questions:

Define the reasonable man - definition is from Blyth v Birmingham Waterworks

Then consider the factors that affect the standard of care of the reasonable man - just use the factors/cases that are relevant to the scenario, e.g. if they are a learner, use Nettleship v Weston, if they are young, Mullins v Richards etc - make comparisons to the scenario throughout

Then discuss any factors that affect the standard of care - just use the factors/cases that are relevant to the scenario, e.g. if the size of the risk is small, if there are benefits to taking the risk... etc. etc. Make comparisons to the scenario throughout

Hope that helps!
0
reply
CharlSharp04049
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#5
Report 5 years ago
#5
I'm a little confused while I'm revising from past papers...
What's the difference between battery and ABH?
In June 2013, Amir was charged with assault, but Carla had ABH injuries due to damage to her wrist. (medical negligence doesn't normally break the chain of causation.)
Why was Amir then charged with assault and not ABH, even tough he had caused Carlas ABH injuries?
0
reply
snikutsmullac
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#6
Report 5 years ago
#6
(Original post by CharlSharp04049)
I'm a little confused while I'm revising from past papers...
What's the difference between battery and ABH?
In June 2013, Amir was charged with assault, but Carla had ABH injuries due to damage to her wrist. (medical negligence doesn't normally break the chain of causation.)
Why was Amir then charged with assault and not ABH, even tough he had caused Carlas ABH injuries?
Battery - a common law offence. The actus reus of battery is 'the unlawful application of force to another'. This can be touching somebodys clothes, as seen in Thomas, or it can be indirect force, as seen in Haystead. The mens rea of battery is 'proof that the defendant intended to apply the unlawful application of force to another'.

ABH - actual bodily harm. This is found under s47 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861. Actual Bodily Harm Was defined in Chan-Fook. 'Actual' - not so trivial as to be wholly insignificant. 'Bodily' - can involve a whole manner of injuries, including psychiatric injury if there is evidence of a psychiatric condition.

So, battery is just merely applying force to someone, e.g. touching them. ABH - is where there is actual harm to the victim, but it need not be really serious (that would be GBH).

Amir is liable for assault. The actus reus of assault is 'any act which causes the victim to apprehend an immediate infliction of unlawful violence'. You have to recognise that Carla panicked and jumped out of the moving car - she feared violence.

Amir did not cause carlas ABH injuries. There is a novus actus intervenius that breaks the chain of causation - the doctor incorrectly put her wrist in a splint. This permanent injury would not have happened if she had been properly treated. Whilst Amirs assault caused carla to jump out of the car, it was the medical negligence (the splint) that caused the permanent damage.
0
reply
smiah1
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#7
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#7
(Original post by snikutsmullac)
What we was told about breach of duty application questions:

Define the reasonable man - definition is from Blyth v Birmingham Waterworks

Then consider the factors that affect the standard of care of the reasonable man - just use the factors/cases that are relevant to the scenario, e.g. if they are a learner, use Nettleship v Weston, if they are young, Mullins v Richards etc - make comparisons to the scenario throughout

Then discuss any factors that affect the standard of care - just use the factors/cases that are relevant to the scenario, e.g. if the size of the risk is small, if there are benefits to taking the risk... etc. etc. Make comparisons to the scenario throughout

Hope that helps!
thank you!
1
reply
WhoNeedsOne
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#8
Report 5 years ago
#8
Guys any predictions?
0
reply
snikutsmullac
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#9
Report 5 years ago
#9
(Original post by WhoNeedsOne)
Guys any predictions?
Criminal Liability Theory Questions:
-Strict Liability, almost ALWAYS comes up
- How an Omission can form the actus reus

Criminal Liability Application Questions:
- one of the statutory offences, s47, s20, s18 - assault almost always comes up so doubt they will use it again
- never known them to do battery, that could be a possibility

Tort theory questions
- Res ipsa loquitur - came up on the first past paper and has not come up since, so quite likely
- Hoping the test for duty of care comes up

Tort application
- Did the defendant owe a duty of care
- Was the duty breached
- Outline causation, did the defendant cause the claimants damage!


The questions on the courts (civil and criminal) are almost always the same every year: so, procedure, aims of sentencing, types of sentencing, how damages are calculated etc.


Really don't know, but I'm looking forward to it :3
0
reply
WhoNeedsOne
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#10
Report 5 years ago
#10
(Original post by snikutsmullac)
Criminal Liability Theory Questions:
-Strict Liability, almost ALWAYS comes up
- How an Omission can form the actus reus

Criminal Liability Application Questions:
- one of the statutory offences, s47, s20, s18 - assault almost always comes up so doubt they will use it again
- never known them to do battery, that could be a possibility

Tort theory questions
- Res ipsa loquitur - came up on the first past paper and has not come up since, so quite likely
- Hoping the test for duty of care comes up

Tort application
- Did the defendant owe a duty of care
- Was the duty breached
- Outline causation, did the defendant cause the claimants damage!


The questions on the courts (civil and criminal) are almost always the same every year: so, procedure, aims of sentencing, types of sentencing, how damages are calculated etc.


Really don't know, but I'm looking forward to it :3
Thanks will do some extra revision on them. Im not looking forwad to it i have 3 exams on that day
0
reply
snikutsmullac
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#11
Report 5 years ago
#11
(Original post by WhoNeedsOne)
Thanks will do some extra revision on them. Im not looking forwad to it i have 3 exams on that day
I'm just guessing by looking at past papers mate, I'm as clueless as you! Don't take my word. Try and revise everything if you can.

I'm a law geek :3
0
reply
FahiimaAkhtar
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#12
Report 5 years ago
#12
(Original post by smiah1)
Hey guys wanted to create a thread for UNIT 2 law exam.
Btw I need help, I don't understand how you apply a scenario to breach of duty, my teacher did not teach us properly so can anyone help me and how would you set the answer out for a breach of duty question, thank you!
Hey, I'm also doing the exam on Monday. For the answer of breach of duty (if you have to relate it back to the scenario) is that you need to include the quote from the case of Blyth V Birmingham Waterworks, you will also need to talk about the reasonable man test and how that varies in different situations.

I'm sure you know there are four reasonable man tests, which consist of the ordinary person doing the job (Wells V cooper), the learner (Nettleship V weston), the professional (Bolom) and the young (Mullin V richards). In the scenario you will have to pick what you think it is, however it will be evidently clear so I'm sure you will be able to spot it.

Also after you have figured what test related to the scenario, you will then need to talk about risk factors (but not all, the ones that relate to the scenario). But all the risk factors are size of the risk (Bolton V Stone), Characteristics of the claimant (Paris V stepney Borough council), have all precautions been taken (Latimer V AEC) and the benfits of the conduct (Watt V hertfordshire County council)



Hope that helps and goodluck! Just carry on doing past paper questions
0
reply
FahiimaAkhtar
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#13
Report 5 years ago
#13
(Original post by snikutsmullac)
Criminal Liability Theory Questions:
-Strict Liability, almost ALWAYS comes up
- How an Omission can form the actus reus

Criminal Liability Application Questions:
- one of the statutory offences, s47, s20, s18 - assault almost always comes up so doubt they will use it again
- never known them to do battery, that could be a possibility

Tort theory questions
- Res ipsa loquitur - came up on the first past paper and has not come up since, so quite likely
- Hoping the test for duty of care comes up

Tort application
- Did the defendant owe a duty of care
- Was the duty breached
- Outline causation, did the defendant cause the claimants damage!


The questions on the courts (civil and criminal) are almost always the same every year: so, procedure, aims of sentencing, types of sentencing, how damages are calculated etc.


Really don't know, but I'm looking forward to it :3
I have a feeling of res ipsa loquitor coming up, it hasn't come up since 2011.
0
reply
neal95
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#14
Report 5 years ago
#14
resitting this from last year and feeling a lot more confident now as a lot of the cases are used in unit 3 Offences against the person and obviously similar actus reus/mens rea
0
reply
snikutsmullac
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#15
Report 5 years ago
#15
(Original post by FahiimaAkhtar)
I have a feeling of res ipsa loquitor coming up, it hasn't come up since 2011.
Hopefully it does - id rather it come up than something like remoteness which is more complicated!
0
reply
CharlSharp04049
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#16
Report 5 years ago
#16
So in what cases does medical negligence not break the chain of causation?
0
reply
Dilsz
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#17
Report 5 years ago
#17
(Original post by snikutsmullac)
Hopefully it does - id rather it come up than something like remoteness which is more complicated!
Remoteness is quite simple compared to everything else

(Original post by CharlSharp04049)
So in what cases does medical negligence not break the chain of causation?
Medical treatment breaks the chain if it 'palpably wrong' (JORDAN), but it doesn't if the injuries were the operative and substantial cause of death (SMITH)


Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
FahiimaAkhtar
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#18
Report 5 years ago
#18
(Original post by FahiimaAkhtar)
I have a feeling of res ipsa loquitor coming up, it hasn't come up since 2011.

But I don't know whether it'll come up on the application question or the theory question.
0
reply
snikutsmullac
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#19
Report 5 years ago
#19
(Original post by Dilsz)
Remoteness is quite simple compared to everything else



Medical treatment breaks the chain if it 'palpably wrong' (JORDAN), but it doesn't if the injuries were the operative and substantial cause of death (SMITH)


Posted from TSR Mobile
Just a matter of opinion!
0
reply
AthiaKarim
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#20
Report 5 years ago
#20
hi everyone! can someone briefly explain to me what the civil procedure act is for law aqa unit 2 exam

thanks
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

University open days

  • Sheffield Hallam University
    Get into Teaching in South Yorkshire Undergraduate
    Wed, 26 Feb '20
  • The University of Law
    Solicitor Series: Assessing Trainee Skills – LPC, GDL and MA Law - London Moorgate campus Postgraduate
    Wed, 26 Feb '20
  • University of East Anglia
    PGCE Open day Postgraduate
    Sat, 29 Feb '20

People at uni: do initiations (like heavy drinking) put you off joining sports societies?

Yes (534)
66.42%
No (270)
33.58%

Watched Threads

View All