Test
Laws 2202 Obligation in Private Law
Preguntas del test (23)
1Lloyds v. Bundy case established the Lloyd test. What was the LLyod test used to determine?
- Amutual effort, economic integration and actual intent, priority of the family
- Bscope for the exercise of power, unilaterally exercise of that power so as to affect the beneficiary’s legal, beneficiary is peculiarly vulnerable to the fiduciary holding the power and (industry practices)
- Cunfair terms or inadequate considerations, bargaining power impaired, absence of independent advice and undue pressure or influence
- Dforum selection, arbitration, term of use and limited of liability
2Legal construct, or civil wrong, other than a breach of contract, which the law will redress by an award of damages is what?
- ABilateral Contract
- BTort
- CPublic trust doctrine
- DUnconscionable bargain
3According to the RWDSU v. Dolphin case what was the courts findings?
- AThe charter didn't apply however it was held because it should be done in accordance with the principles of the charter
- BYes the charter applied and nothing more was found
- CThere was an enrichment of the defendant and corresponding deprivation of the plaintiff
- DThe court found that the RWDSU fell short of being able to demonstrate that any ‘incontrovertible’ benefit had been received by the defendants.
4In Canada,as an element of domestic contracts: under the Family Law Act (1990 [2015]), which of the following is not set out
- ADomestic contracts are unenforceable unless made in writing.
- BDomestic contracts may address the ownership or division of property.
- CDomestic contracts may address the moral training or education of children.
- DDomestic contracts cannot be entered into by minors.
5Fiduciary Obligations are obligations that expect reliance on you and expect to be loyal; obligations to act in the interests of another. Strongly associated with notions of trust, loyalty, and reliance of another party.
- AVerdadero
- BFalso
6Click-wrap contract consist of four things:
- AForum selection or choice of law, Arbitration, Terms of use and Limitation of liability
- Bpecuniary, nominal, additional and punitive
- CMutual effort economic integration actual intent and priority of the Family
- Dduress of goods, expectant heir, undue influence and salvage agreement
7 In L’Estrange v. F Graucaob Ltd., what did the court rule was the distinction between a binding legal contract and the ‘sales agreement’ that the plaintiff signed?
- Aa contract requires offer, acceptance and the exchange of consideration; a sales agreement does not.
- Bthere is less of a burden on parties to disclose exclusionary clauses in a sales agreement
- Csales agreements are understood to imply warranty
- Dsales agreements are not legally binding
- Enone of the above (the court found no difference)
8According to the Supreme Court of Canada, as noted in Frame v. Smith, when a plaintiff comes forward with a case where there is no existing cause of action under tort law, the court
- AIs limited to non-pecuniary remedies, such as performance.
- BMay devise a new tort to meet the situation.
- CMust dismiss the legal action as being without cause.
- DNone of the above.
9Constitutional Values and Private Law does what
- Adraw on public culture and present a public justification of its conclusion
- BPoints out that an economic-centric analysis tries to take a more macro approach to the ‘costs’ of a law or rule
- C• Strongly advocates legal protections to recognize the inherently unequal and likely compromised position that many (not necessarily all) women in marriages may find themselves in.
- DAll of the above
10Resulting Trust differs from consecutive trust because
- AIt arises under specific conditions, resulting from the actions or intentions of parties, while constructive is imposed by courts in response to an injustice or inappropriate action
- BIs a result of insufficient evidence while constructive construct is constructed by a individual as a means of personal gain.
- CIs a result of fluidity while constructive trust is a combination of trust reliant and loyalty.
- DNone of the above
11Establishes that, in general, the commercial provisioning of alcohol (governed by provincial statute) does produce a prima facie duty of care between the seller and the patron. Further, the standards of care will depend on the details of the situation, and the foreseeability of potential harms.
What case established this?- AChilds v. Desormeaux
- BStewart v. Pettie
- CKamloops v. Nielson
- DCooper v. Hobart
- ENone of the above
12 Reaffirms the duty of care owed by commercial hosts, but limits the standard of care required to a certain degree as based on the specifics of the situation. Begins to recognize that standards of care implying positive action should be considered the highest standards, and are appropriate only when harm is truly foreseeable.
Was established by what case?- ABalfour v. Balfour
- BStewart v. Pettie
- CJordan House Ltd. v. Menow
- DKamloops v. Nielson
13The courts ruling put agreements and promises made verbally inside a family unit outside the purview of formal contract law – unless they were to conform to the classic ‘form’ of the contract.
Was established by what case?- ATercon Contractors Ltd v. British Columbia
- BBalfour v. Balfour
- CFrame v. Smith
- DMoses v. Macpherlan
14Established the way in which the court views contracts mediated by machines, and the requisite notice and ‘moment in time’ where terms and conditions would need to be provided in order for them to be an enforceable component of said contractual arrangement.
Was established by what case?- ARathwell v. Rathwell
- BL’Estrange v. F Graucaob Ltd.
- CThornton v. Shoe Lane Parking Limited
- DParadis Honey Ltd. v. Canada
15The case upheld the validity of the very broad exclusionary clause, despite the fact the plaintiff had not been aware of the clause at the time she signed the agreement. The judge did, however, note that the contract ought to have been in clearer language, and that it was unfortunate that the clause in question was not in larger print.
- AL’Estrange v. F Graucaob Ltd.
- BRathwell v. Rathwell
- CPeevyhouse v. Garland Coal & Mining Co.
- DCarlil v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co.
16In Peevyhouse v. Garland Coal & Mining Co. (1962), the important issue the court considered was:
- Adid a fiduciary duty arise during arms length commercial negotiations.
- BWhether the cost of performance rule or the value rule should be applied.
- Chow to apply the principle of unjust enrichment where commercial contracts
are in place. - DWhether a duty of care owed by commercial hosts extends to third parties.
17Establishes, and enshrines in the Constitution, fundamental rights and freedoms subject only to the limits that can be demonstrated as justifiable in a free and democratic society is what ?
- ACharter of Rights
- BTort
- CPrivate Law
- DContract Law
18What are the steps a court takes in order to test whether or not a contract has been breached?
- Aunfair terms, bargaining power was impaired by necessity ignorance , absence of independent advice and undue pressure or influence
- Bproximity and forseeabillity
- Caccountability, unconscionability, and overriding public policy consideration
- Dscope for the exercise power, unilateral exercise of power can affect another legal interests, beneficiary vulnerability of fiduciary power.
19Functions of tort law
- Adeterrence, composition , education , ombudsman, empowerment of individuals and psychological contact
- Bmutual consent, capacity, purposeful character, exchange and legal form
- Cbasic definition, differentiation, lacking minerals and importance in law
- Dduress of goods, expectant heir, undue influence, undue pressure, salvage agreement
20If someone runs over your foot due to a faulty break who is awarded damages and what type of damages will they be awarded?
- AIndividual who ran over your foot; awarded pecuniary damages.
- BCar manufacturers; non-pecuniary damages
- CCar manufacturer; punitive damages
- DIndividual who ran over your foot; nominal damages
21As set out in the cases reviewed, and in lecture, the three essential elements for determining unjust enrichment are:
- AUnfair enrichment occurred, the enrichment was purposeful, and restitution is possible.
- BA benefit was provided resulting in enrichment, the benefit received was at the detriment of the provider, and there is no juristic reason for the enrichment.
- CReceipt of a benefit that, if kept, offends the principles of equity and good
conscience. - DA direct benefit was transferred, the transfer was unjust, and there is an absence of juristic categories which could deny recovery.
22“You must take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions which you can reasonably foresee would be likely to injure your neighbour. Who, then, in law, is my neighbour? The answer seems to be – persons who are so closely and directly affected by my act that I ought reasonably to have them in contemplation as being so affected when I am directing my mind to the acts or omissions which are called in question.”
The above quotation comes from which of the following cases:- ACooper v. Hobart
- BKamloops v. Nielson
- CDonoghue v. Stevenson
- DParadis Honey Ltd. v. Canada
23Private law is characterized by a series of codified rules (or doctrines) which are applied and interpreted by courts on issues including torts, contract disputes, and matters of equity (unjust enrichment, fiduciary duties).
- AVerdadero
- BFalso
Información
- Descripción
- Law Test sobre Laws 2202 Obligation in Private Law , creado por Diamond H el 18/12/2016.
- Autor
- Diamond H
- Idioma
- English
- Visitas
- 59
- Etiquetas
- Valoración
- Aún sin valoraciones Valora este test