Wrong MCQ's Flashcards
Four months ago, a council refused a woman’s application for a licence to drive a taxi. The council has not given any reasons for rejecting the woman’s application.
(E) The woman cannot bring judicial review proceedings because she has not complied with the time limit. Usually, an application for judicial review needs to be brought promptly, but no later than three months after the action being reviewed occurred. (A) is incorrect because there is an issue of public law here, in that a decision was made by a public body (the local council). (B) is incorrect because it is not the best answer. It is possible that a judicial review could have been brought on the basis of a failure to give reasons, but, as mentioned, the woman failed to bring judicial review proceedings within the time limit. (C) is incorrect because this statement is untrue. If there are grounds to challenge such a decision (such as procedural impropriety), a judicial review claim can be brought. (D) is incorrect. The woman would have standing because she is the person affected by the decision.
In 2021, a case requires the Court of Appeal to interpret a provision of retained EU law. The appellant argues that it should apply a decision of the Supreme Court from 2014. The respondent disagrees, arguing that the court is free to adopt its own interpretation.
(E) The Supreme Court decision is part of retained domestic case law and, thus, binds the Court of Appeal. Because the Supreme Court decision pre-dates the end of the transition period (December 2020) and involves the interpretation of retained EU law by a domestic court, it forms part of retained domestic case law. For retained domestic case law, the ordinary rules of precedent apply-courts are bound by decisions from courts that are higher or equivalent to them. Thus, the Supreme Court decision is binding on the Court of Appeal. (A) and (C) are incorrect because they refer to retained EU case law, whereas the Supreme Court decision is part of retained domestic case law. (B) is incorrect because, as mentioned, the Supreme Court decision does bind the Court of Appeal. (D) is incorrect because the Supreme Court decision forms part of retained domestic case law.QUESTION ID: CNL129
Question
During a seminar, the concept of limited rights as a category of rights under the European Convention of Human Rights (‘ECHR’) was being discussed.
Which of the following best describes the concept of limited rights?
(B) Limited rights under the ECHR are rights that can be restricted only under the circumstances described in the ECHR article itself. (A), (C), (D), and (E) are incorrect because they do not correctly describe limited rights. QUESTION ID: CNL134
During a case, the Court of Appeal is required to interpret an Act of Parliament to determine whether it complies with Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights (‘ECHR’) and the right to a fair trial. The appellant wishes the court to simply make a declaration of incompatibility. The respondent argues that the court should first try to interpret the legislation in a manner that complies with the ECHR.
Which of the following best explains how the court should proceed?
(B) The court should first consider whether it can interpret the Act in a manner that complies with the ECHR before going on to make a declaration of incompatibility. Under the Human Rights Act 1998 (which incorporates most of the ECHR), the UK courts must attempt to interpret legislation so that it complies with the Convention rights. If the court is unable to do so, it can make a declaration of incompatibility. (A) is incorrect because the courts cannot simply make a declaration of incompatibility without first attempting to construe the legislation. (C) and (D) are incorrect because there is no provision for a reference to be made in this way. (E) is incorrect because even if a declaration of incompatibility is made, the court must still apply the legislation to the case before it.QUESTION ID: CNL140
Question
An individual believes that they were harshly treated by the police at a protest and prevented from lawfully exercising their rights to freedom of association and freedom of assembly under Article 11 of the Human Rights Act 1998 (‘HRA’). A campaign group wants to take up the individual’s case.
Does the campaign group have standing?
(C) The campaign group does not have standing because the group is not the victim of the police’s conduct. As indicated, the claim that the campaign group wishes to bring involves a breach of human rights as protected by the HRA. The test for standing for human rights matters is the ‘victim’ test. Because a ‘victim’ is defined as one who is directly affected by the conduct at issue, representative standing (that is, where a group brings a claim on behalf of others) is not allowed under the HRA. (A) is incorrect because it reaches the correct result, but for the wrong reason. Groups or associations may be able to establish standing to represent others for judicial review claims. However, as mentioned, for claims brought under the HRA, such standing is not permitted. (B) is incorrect because the sufficient interest test is the standard used for standing for judicial review claims. (D) and (E) are incorrect because, as discussed, the ‘victim’ test does not allow for representative standing. QUESTION ID: CNL069
Question
Following the UK’s exit from the EU, it emerges that an Act of Parliament enacted in 1997 does not comply with an EU regulation. The regulation came into force in 2014 while the UK was a member state of the EU.
Which of the following best explains the status of the Act?
Question
Following the UK’s exit from the EU, it emerges that an Act of Parliament enacted in 1997 does not comply with an EU regulation. The regulation came into force in 2014 while the UK was a member state of the EU.
Which of the following best explains the status of the Act?
A woman fractured her leg when she fell off a rollercoaster at a well-known theme park. The theme park has admitted fault. The woman has submitted a claim for £9,000 for her fractured leg. In what court would the claim most likely be heard?
(E) Personal injury claims between the sums of more than £1,500 and up to £25,000 are allocated to the fast track unless they are too complex. Here, the claim is for £9,000, and as the theme park has admitted liability, the case is almost certainly not too complex for Fast Track. (A) is incorrect, as the Small Claims Track is used for personal injury cases only if the claim is for not more than £1,500. (B) is incorrect. Generally, a personal injury claim can be heard in High Court only if it is for more than £50,000 or too complex for the Multi-Track. As just explained, the case here does not meet these criteria. (C) and (D) are incorrect as a case will be allocated to Multi-Track only if it is too complex for Fast Track or over £25,000.QUESTION ID: ELS061
Do magistrates’ courts deal with both civil and criminal cases?
Yes
Question
A solicitor becomes aware that a partner in her firm is selling illegal drugs. To the solicitor’s knowledge, the partner has been doing this on his personal time only.
Which of the following statements best describes the solicitor’s obligations under the SRA Standards and Regulations?
(A) If a solicitor is aware that any person or body (including themselves) has committed a serious breach of a regulatory arrangement, they must ensure that a prompt report is made to the SRA or other approved regulator, as appropriate. Any obligation to provide information to the SRA is satisfied if the solicitor provides the information to their firm’s COLP (compliance officer for legal practice) or COFA (compliance officer for finance and administration), as and where appropriate, on the understanding that they will provide the information to the SRA. (B) is incorrect because a solicitor meets their obligation by reporting the matter to the COLP on the understanding the COLP will make a report. The solicitor is not required to make their own report to the SRA (unless there is some indication that the COLP will not make a report). (C) is incorrect because a solicitor must report the serious breaches of other solicitors, as well as their own serious breaches. (D) is incorrect because once the solicitor provides information to the COLP on the understanding that the COLP will report the matter to the SRA, the solicitor has no duty to check that a report was made. (E) is incorrect because a breach can be serious even if it is not connected with any legal services; the SRA generally regards criminal behaviour as being serious.QUESTION ID: ETH159
A corporate solicitor works in a niche commercial law firm. He has a very good relationship with the director of a firm who instructs him on a regular basis to advise the business on company law. One day, the director phones the solicitor to say that he is getting married next week and he would like the solicitor to draw up a pre-nuptial agreement for him. This instruction would require knowledge of an area of law in which the solicitor does not practise. The director says that he appreciates that this is not what the solicitor would normally do for the business, but that he trusts the solicitor to protect his interests as the solicitor has always provided such an excellent service to the business.
Should the solicitor accept the director’s instructions in this matter?
No, because the solicitor must ensure that the service provided to clients is competent.
A person is selling his house to a first-time buyer who has not used a solicitor before. The seller has instructed his solicitor to act on the sale and has suggested that the solicitor also act for the buyer to keep things simple. The seller’s solicitor declines to act for the buyer.
Which of the following statements best describes whether the solicitor was correct to decline to act for the buyer?
A person is selling his house to a first-time buyer who has not used a solicitor before. The seller has instructed his solicitor to act on the sale and has suggested that the solicitor also act for the buyer to keep things simple. The seller’s solicitor declines to act for the buyer.
Which of the following statements best describes whether the solicitor was correct to decline to act for the buyer?
A commercial company has approached a solicitor to act on its behalf in respect of the potential acquisition of a rival business. The solicitor has shares in the rival business and will make a significant profit if the deal is completed. The solicitor discloses this to the company and advises them that if they take independent advice on this point then he will be able to accept their instructions. The company agrees to take independent advice.
Should the solicitor act for the company in these circumstances?
(A) A solicitor must not act if there is an own interest conflict or a significant risk of an own interest conflict, such as in circumstances where the solicitor will gain a financial advantage if a client’s instructions are completed. (B), (C), (D), and (E) are incorrect because an own interest conflict is an absolute bar to acting.QUESTION ID: ETH130
The Court of Appeal of the Bahamas (which is a British Commonwealth) has just heard an appeal. The losing party was advised that they can appeal to a court located in the UK.
To which court can the losing party appeal?
They can appeal to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.
A law student is reading an Act of Parliament for the first time. The student reads the following language:
BE IT ENACTED by the King’s most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:
Which of the following best describes the passage the student read?
The preamble.
In a constituency, an unpopular Labour Member of Parliament (‘MP’) has been suspended for 15 days from the House of Commons for poor conduct in the House chamber. The local Conservative Party wish to unseat the MP before the next election.
Which of the following provides the best way for the local Conservative Party to trigger a by-election?
Obtaining consent from 10% of the electorate in the constituency through a recall petition.
To trigger a by-election, the local Conservative Party should obtain the consent of 10% of the electorate evidenced by their signing a recall petition. Under the Recall of MPs Act 2015, if an MP has been suspended for more than 10 days, this triggers a recall petition in the constituency of the MP. If more than 10% of the electorate in that constituency sign the petition, then a by-election is held
