Question 1

What legal term is derived from the Latin word meaning "crooked"?
A) deceit
B) tort
C) thief
D) fraud

Accepted Answer

The term "tort" is derived from the Latin word "tortum," which means "crooked" or "twisted."

Question 2

What tort arises when lawyers,accountants,or other professionals give their clients incompetent advice that causes loss?
A) deceit
B) passing off
C) negligence
D) professional irresponsibility

Accepted Answer

Negligence arises when professionals fail to exercise the standard of care that a reasonably competent professional would, resulting in harm or loss to their clients.

Question 3

Which of the following would be characteristic of an offence of aggravated assault under s.268(1)of the Criminal Code of Canada?
A) entering onto another person's property without consent
B) wilful disfiguration or endangerment of another person
C) commission of a careless act causing loss to another
D) idle talk of threats to physically harm another person

Accepted Answer

Aggravated assault under s.268(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada involves intentionally causing bodily harm that is of a serious nature or using or threatening to use a weapon. Wilful disfiguration or endangerment of another person would typically meet the criteria for this offence. The other options listed do not meet the criteria for aggravated assault under this section.

Question 4

Which of the following is an intentional tort?
A) product liability
B) battery
C) careless driving
D) negligence

Accepted Answer

The answer of Which of the following is an intentional...

Question 5

Rodolfo was permanently injured in a vehicle collision.He retained Pilgren six months prior to the limitation date to commence a law suit on his behalf.Pilgren incorrectly noted the limitation date.As a result,he failed to file the claim within the prescribed time.What is the tort that arises in these circumstances?
A) professional negligence
B) professional incompetence
C) incompetence
D) negligence

Accepted Answer

The tort that arises in these circumstances is professional negligence, also known as legal malpractice. Pilgren (the professional) had a duty of care to properly note the limitation date and file the claim in a timely manner. By failing to do so, they breached that duty and caused harm to Rodolfo.

Question 6

Which of the following is a distinguishing feature of a criminal hearing with respect to the burden of proof?
A) A finding of guilt must be capable of being logically deduced from the evidence.
B) All elements of the alleged crimes must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
C) All elements of the alleged crime must be sufficient to raise a reasonable doubt.
D) A finding of guilt may be established without contrary evidence being presented.

Accepted Answer

The answer of Which of the following is a distinguishing...

Question 7

Which of the following is the phrase "unreasonable conduct" synonymous with when considered in its legal context?
A) battery
B) deceit
C) negligence
D) fraud

Accepted Answer

In legal context, "unreasonable conduct" is generally used to refer to behavior that a reasonable person would not do in a similar situation, which is the definition of negligence. The other choices, battery, deceit, and fraud involve intentional action rather than negligence.

Question 8

What are the legal terms given to the party bringing a criminal action and to the party bringing a tort action?
A) petitioner,complainant
B) applicant,plaintiff
C) appellant,complainant
D) the Crown,plaintiff

Accepted Answer

In legal terms, the party bringing a criminal action is referred to as "the Crown" (or "the state" in some jurisdictions), and the party bringing a tort action is referred to as the "plaintiff."

Question 9

Neither Jeremy nor Jayson could afford the $60 ticket price for the RTG concert,but they were determined to go nonetheless.They were humiliated when they were apprehended shortly after sneaking in through a side entrance,charged,and sternly escorted from the building.What is the most likely infraction arising from these circumstances?
A) defamation of character
B) trespass to land
C) libel
D) negligence

Accepted Answer

The most likely infraction in this situation is trespass to land, as Jeremy and Jayson entered the concert venue without permission or payment. Defamation of character, libel, and negligence are not applicable in this scenario.

Question 10

Which of these statements correctly describes the relationship between tort law and criminal law?
A) Legal consequences may arise under either criminal or tort law,but not both.
B) Legal consequences can arise under criminal and tort law from the same event.
C) A tort is a public wrong whereas a crime is a private wrong.
D) Anyone committing a tortious act commits an offence under the Criminal Code.

Accepted Answer

An event can lead to both criminal charges and a tort claim, as criminal law addresses public wrongs and tort law addresses private wrongs.

Question 11

What is considered to be the critical intent behind the prosecution of criminal acts that contravene the laws prescribed in the Criminal Code of Canada?
A) to facilitate the rehabilitation of society's less than fortunate citizens
B) to determine awards of compensation for the victims of crimes
C) to determine and enforce the adequate punishment of wrongdoers
D) to maintain respect for established societal rights of the Canadian people

Accepted Answer

The critical intent behind the prosecution of criminal acts is to determine and enforce the adequate punishment of wrongdoers. While rehabilitation and compensation for victims are important factors in the justice system, the primary purpose of criminal prosecution is to hold offenders accountable for their actions and deter others from committing similar crimes in the future. Maintaining respect for established societal rights is also important, but it is not the primary intent of criminal prosecution.

Question 12

Where the same incident has led to both criminal charges and the commencement of a lawsuit,what will most likely be the result?
A) A criminal conviction ensures a successful civil liability action in tort.
B) Criminal conviction is relevant to establishing a related civil action in tort.
C) A prior civil compensatory award for tort ensures criminal conviction.
D) Civil actions are unable to proceed without a prior criminal conviction.

Accepted Answer

A criminal conviction can be used as evidence in a related civil action in tort, but it does not guarantee success. The two proceedings are separate, and a civil compensatory award does not guarantee a criminal conviction. Civil actions may proceed independently of criminal proceedings.

Question 13

What does the law consider to be a qualifying act with respect to the commission of a tort of battery?
A) an uninvited intentional occupation of another person's property
B) an uninvited intentional physical violation of another's bodily security
C) a careless act or omission that causes harm to another
D) an overt threat of imminent physical harm

Accepted Answer

A qualifying act with respect to the commission of a tort of battery is an uninvited intentional physical violation of another's bodily security. This means that the perpetrator deliberately touches or strikes another person without their consent, causing harm or offense.

Question 14

Which of the following is most likely attributable to a private prosecution?
A) a rare form of criminal prosecution initiated by a private individual
B) a rare form of civil action in which the defendant is a private individual
C) a typical form of civil action in which the plaintiff is a private individual
D) a typical form of criminal prosecution initiated by the Crown

Accepted Answer

Private prosecution is a rare form of criminal prosecution initiated by a private individual rather than the Crown.

Question 15

While a central function of tort law is compensation for innocent victims,why might the application of tort law not result in compensation for an innocent victim?
A) because any fault on the part of the victim will negate his or her claim
B) because the wrongdoer was already convicted criminally for the same wrong
C) because the victim has failed to satisfy the "clean hands" rule
D) because tort law requires blameworthy conduct on the part of the defendant

Accepted Answer

The answer of While a central function of tort law...

Question 16

How do the burdens of proof in criminal cases and tort cases differ?
A) The burden of proof in a criminal case is higher than in a tort case.
B) The burden of proof in a criminal case is "beyond a balance of probabilities," but it must be "proven beyond a reasonable doubt" in a tort case.
C) The burden of proof in a criminal case rests with the accused,whereas in tort cases it rests with the plaintiff.
D) It is easier to prove a tort case than it is to prove a criminal case

Accepted Answer

In a criminal case, the burden of proof is beyond a reasonable doubt, which means that the prosecution must prove their case to a high standard of certainty. Whereas in a tort case, the burden of proof is a preponderance of the evidence, which means that it is more likely than not that the defendant is responsible for causing the harm. Therefore, the burden of proof in a criminal case is higher than in a tort case.

Question 17

Armand,who previously had no reason to believe he was in poor health,crashed his truck into a parked car after unexpectedly fainting at the wheel.Under these circumstances,why might the owner of the damaged vehicle be prevented from recovering compensation from Armand?
A) The type of damages was not reasonably foreseeable.
B) Armand has insurance and therefore is protected from being sued.
C) No tort has been committed by Armand.
D) Armand owes no duty of care in these circumstances.

Accepted Answer

Armand may not have committed a tort if the fainting was sudden and unforeseeable, as this could be considered an involuntary act, thus lacking the intent or negligence required for liability.

Question 18

Which of the following is a valid defence to a claim for damages for losses arising from an alleged negligent act?
A) The act causing the harmful event was unintentional.
B) The loss was reasonably unforeseeable or reasonably unpreventable
C) The act is an indictable offence under the Criminal Code of Canada.
D) The loss was reasonably foreseeable or reasonably preventable.

Accepted Answer

B is a valid defence as it argues that the loss was unforeseeable or unpreventable. A is not a valid defence as unintentional acts can still be negligent. C is not a valid defence as criminal charges are separate from civil claims for damages. D is not a defence as it admits that the loss was foreseeable or preventable.

Question 19

Which of the following describes the distinction between criminal law and tort law?
A) Tort law doesn't require the defendant's fault,whereas criminal law does require fault.
B) Tort litigation must be commenced by a business,whereas criminal proceedings are commenced by victims of crime.
C) Tort law is concerned with insurance claims,whereas criminal law is concerned with restitution to victims of crime.
D) Tort law is concerned with compensation,whereas criminal law is concerned with punishment.

Accepted Answer

Tort law focuses on providing compensation to victims for harm caused by others, while criminal law is concerned with punishing offenders and maintaining public order.

Question 20

Which of the following statements best describes one of the key objectives of tort law?
A) to allow parties certainty and the ability to plan their business affairs
B) to determine when a loss by one person should be shifted to the person responsible
C) to ensure that negligent parties are punished for their carelessness
D) to prevent losses

Accepted Answer

Tort law primarily aims to determine when a loss suffered by one party should be compensated by another party who is responsible for causing that loss, typically through negligence or intentional harm.

Quiz 10: Introduction to Tort Law

What legal term is derived from the Latin word meaning "crooked"?

What tort arises when lawyers,accountants,or other professionals give their clients incompetent advice that causes loss?

Which of the following would be characteristic of an offence of aggravated assault under s.268(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada?

Which of the following is an intentional tort?

Which of the following is a distinguishing feature of a criminal hearing with respect to the burden of proof?

Which of the following is the phrase "unreasonable conduct" synonymous with when considered in its legal context?

What are the legal terms given to the party bringing a criminal action and to the party bringing a tort action?

Which of these statements correctly describes the relationship between tort law and criminal law?

What is considered to be the critical intent behind the prosecution of criminal acts that contravene the laws prescribed in the Criminal Code of Canada?

Where the same incident has led to both criminal charges and the commencement of a lawsuit,what will most likely be the result?

What does the law consider to be a qualifying act with respect to the commission of a tort of battery?

Which of the following is most likely attributable to a private prosecution?

While a central function of tort law is compensation for innocent victims,why might the application of tort law not result in compensation for an innocent victim?

How do the burdens of proof in criminal cases and tort cases differ?

Armand,who previously had no reason to believe he was in poor health,crashed his truck into a parked car after unexpectedly fainting at the wheel.Under these circumstances,why might the owner of the damaged vehicle be prevented from recovering compensation from Armand?

Which of the following is a valid defence to a claim for damages for losses arising from an alleged negligent act?

Which of the following describes the distinction between criminal law and tort law?

Which of the following statements best describes one of the key objectives of tort law?