LLB Tort Law - Practice Paper 3

Professor Adams, a renowned surgeon, performs a complex spinal operation on Beth at St Mary's Hospital NHS Trust. During the operation, Adams inadvertently severs a nerve, leaving Beth paralysed from the waist down. Medical evidence shows that even with reasonable care, there was a 30% risk of this complication, but Adams's technique increased the risk to 60%. Adams had informed Beth that the risk of paralysis was "very small" without quantifying it. Beth says she would have sought a second opinion had she known the true risk, and the second surgeon she would have consulted uses a technique with only a 15% risk. Beth's husband, Craig, who waited in the hospital corridor throughout the operation, is told by a nurse that "something has gone very wrong." He rushes to the recovery room and sees Beth connected to machines, unable to move. Craig develops severe depression. Advise Beth and Craig on all potential claims against Adams and the Trust.

Critically examine the relationship between negligence and the Occupiers' Liability Acts. To what extent are the Acts merely a specific statutory application of general negligence principles, and where do they diverge?

Mercury Chemicals plc operates a processing plant near a residential area. The plant stores large quantities of toxic chemicals in underground tanks. Due to a crack in one tank that Mercury's engineers failed to detect during routine inspections, chemicals leak into the groundwater, contaminating wells used by local homeowners. The contamination is only discovered three years later when residents notice their water tastes unusual. Testing reveals chemical levels significantly above safe limits. Fiona, who has been drinking the contaminated water for three years, is diagnosed with liver damage that experts link to the chemical exposure. George, Fiona's next-door neighbour, discovers the contamination has reduced his property value by 40%. Helena, a local organic farmer, loses her organic certification because her land has absorbed chemicals from the contaminated groundwater, costing her £100,000 in lost premium pricing over five years. Advise Fiona, George, and Helena against Mercury Chemicals plc.

The law of tort aims to compensate victims for harm suffered. Critically assess whether the current framework of damages in personal injury cases achieves this aim, with reference to the distinction between general and special damages, the assessment of future losses, and the availability of provisional damages.

Atlas Delivery Services hires couriers as 'independent contractors' under contracts that require them to wear Atlas uniforms, use Atlas-branded vehicles, follow Atlas route schedules, and attend daily briefings. Courier Jim, while making a delivery in an Atlas van, runs a red light and collides with a cyclist, Karen. Jim then leaves the scene to complete his deliveries without exchanging details, which constitutes a criminal offence. Karen suffers a broken pelvis and is unable to work for six months. Her partner, Lily, who is at home when Karen calls crying in pain from the roadside, rushes to the scene and finds Karen lying injured in the road. Lily develops PTSD. Karen's bicycle, a custom racing bike worth £8,000, is destroyed. The cyclist following behind Karen, Mike, brakes hard to avoid the collision scene, falls off his bike, and breaks his collarbone. Advise Karen, Lily, and Mike, with particular reference to whether Atlas may be held vicariously liable for Jim's actions.