the UK's law coursework
& essay library

1st & 2.1 work written by
UK LLB law students

  • 10 downloads - £4.99
  • 50 downloads - £9.99
  • 150 downloads - £19.99

Support your studies today

  • Guide your essay writing
  • Improve your confidence
  • Beat writer's block
  • Use when revising for exams
  • Help keep academic stress at bay
  • Learn more - finish work on time
with less worry

Latest submissions

Question: Legal Process Major Assignment

Contents
Summary of relevant facts: 2
The issues 2
Rules and Application 2
Sparrow v Tortoise 2
Victorious v Medic Pty. Ltd 3
Smashead v Crumble 4
Careless v Johnson 5
Meathead v Varoom 5
Cactus V Orchid 6
Sneaky v Tantrum 6
Conclusion 7


Summary of relevant facts:
Janet has a black belt in martial arts and was known to be able to take care of herself, she was employed by Rattlecar as a casual night watchperson and had been given strict instructions not to assault or restrain an intruder, at most just to attempt to scare them off, and to trigger the alarm, then immediately call the police.

Events unfolded on the forecourt of Rattlecar’s workshop, where Janet’s own car was being stored as it was being worked on during the day within the workshop. Janet’s car was her pride and joy and she spent every spare cent on parts for the car and every spare minute working on the car. On the evening in question unknown to Janet, Gordon Bloggs had arranged to collect his car from the premises after work. When he arrived at Rattlecar he was knocked to the ground by Janet, who continued to hit him until Kelvin intervened. Gordon Bloggs was suffered seriously injures while at the premises of Rattlecar. Janet’s employment was subsequently terminated.

The issues
The main issue is whether Rattlecar as employer is vicariously liable for the conduct of Janet, its employee, in respect of the injuries suffered by Gordon Bloggs at the premises of Rattlecar on the date in question.

Answer: Rules and Application Sparrow v Tortoise Rattlecar employed Janet as night watchperson as she had a black belt in martial arts and was known to be able to take care of herself....


Read more of the answer →

Details: - Mark: Not available | Course: Criminal Law | Year: 1st | Words: 1814 | References: No | Date written: Not available | Date submitted: June 14, 2018 | Coursework ID: 1046

Question: In Hunter v Mann (1974) Boreham J said that a doctor is under a duty not to disclose voluntarily information which he, the doctor, has gained in his professional capacity, save in very exceptional circumstances. However, in practice, it seems that the circumstances in which information about a patient may be disclosed to others is very far from exceptional.’

Critically discuss this statement, with reference both to relevant cases and legislation. 75%

Answer: The duty of confidentiality cannot be an absolute obligation, Siegler argues that preserving it may constrict good administration in hospitals, there must be a degree of flexibility as to all. Scholars like...


Read more of the answer →

Details: - Mark: 75% | Course: Medical Law | Year: 1st | Words: 1448 | References: No | Date written: Not available | Date submitted: May 06, 2018 | Coursework ID: 1045

Question: ‘The challenging questions about medical confidentiality do not, however, lie in establishing a general duty of confidence, or expectation of privacy, but in determining what amounts to “very exceptional circumstances” justifying breach of that duty.’ (Brazier and Cave, Medicine Patients and the Law).

With reference to this statement critically discuss the extent to which exceptions to the duty to keep confidences raise challenges for the medical profession. 75%

Answer: It is without a doubt that there is no challenge in establishing a general duty of confidence especially in the area of medical law, confidentiality has its roots traced back to the...


Read more of the answer →

Details: - Mark: 75% | Course: Medical Law | Year: 1st | Words: 1836 | References: No | Date written: Not available | Date submitted: May 06, 2018 | Coursework ID: 1044

Question: Psychological Injury – Problem Question
A coach, full of young children coming back from a day trip to the theatre, is involved in a multiple vehicle pile-up on the motorway, caused by negligent driving of Steve, the driver and owner of one of the cars in the pile-up. One of the children, Abbey, is seriously injured in the accident. Her foster parents are at work and cannot be contacted immediately. When they eventually get to the hospital, five hours later, they are traumatized by the state in which they find their foster daughter. Although Abbey makes a full physical recovery both she and her parents develop PTSD. Another of the children, Cosmo, was trapped in the wreckage and suffered serious head injuries. Bob, a passing motorist who stopped to help, and Ray an ambulance worker who arrived at the scene, both struggle long and hard to free him. However, when they eventually do so, he dies and both Bob and Ray go on to develop depression as a result, Cosmo’s father is beset with grief for many months as he identifies his son’s body at the mortuary 2 hours later.

Bob’s behaviour has been very erratic ever since the accident and has been prone to fits of uncontrollable rage. Last week he got into an argument with his neighbour over a trivial matter which culminated in Bob hitting him over the head with a heavy object. The neighbour had died as a result of his injuries and Bob is now facing many years in jail and the loss of his job and family.

Advise Abbey and her parents and Bob, Ray and Cosmo’s father.

Answer: Abbey v Steve Abbey would succeed in a claim for the personal injury sustained as Steve owed a duty to every other road user (Nettleship v Weston) and has clearly fallen below...


Read more of the answer →

Details: - Mark: 80% | Course: Tort Law | Year: 1st | Words: 1648 | References: No | Date written: Not available | Date submitted: May 06, 2018 | Coursework ID: 1043

Question: Alphie, a minor celebrity, was recently admitted to hospital following an accident in which he damaged his leg. Due to his shock, Alphie lost consciousness shortly after he was brought into the hospital. The doctor who examined him was very concerned, and called the surgeon who decided it was necessary to remove two of Alphie’s toes. When he woke therefore, Alphie was missing his toes and was particularly upset that he had not agreed to this.

During Alphie’s week long stay in hospital to recover, the man in the bed beside him, Jack, was very disruptive. Alphie found this increasingly irritating as he could not sleep. He told Jack to ‘pipe down’ but Jack insisted ‘I’ll do what I like’. At this point Alphie sat up in his bed and shouted, ‘you know, you are very lucky I can’t get up right now, or I swear I would bash your head in.’ In response, Jack, got up from his own bed and grabbing Alphie by the collar whispered menacingly in his face ‘just watch yourself boy, I can hurt you more easily than you can harm me.’ Alphie was left very shaken.

When Alphie’s friend Susan visited she offered to put a sleeping drug in Jack’s water. Alphie agreed and Susan drugged Jack’s water while he was in the bathroom. Seeing her opportunity, Susan also blocked the bathroom door with a hospital trolley, trapping Jack in. Jack was shut in the bathroom for almost 10 minutes, but because he was showering, a hospital porter moved the trolley before he tried to get out. Jack therefore never realised he was trapped. When he drank some water a few minutes later, Jack fell asleep and felt quite poorly when he woke up.

On leaving hospital, Alphie gave an interview to a press reporter. He told her all about his stay in hospital, and joked that he and Susan had ‘got their own back’ on Jack. Since he read this in the newspaper, Jack has suffered depression and nightmares for which he has needed medical treatment.

Advise Alphie and Jack of any claims they may have in tort.

Answer: A may have a claim in battery (the unlawful contact which is direct and intentional (or reckless)). There’s no minimum level of violence which the law will to accept and the force...


Read more of the answer →

Details: - Mark: 65% | Course: Tort Law | Year: 2nd/3rd | Words: 800 | References: No | Date written: November, 2016 | Date submitted: December 06, 2017 | Coursework ID: 1041

Question: Andrew is at a restaurant with his partner Billy. Carla the waiter spills soup over Billy. Andrew is furious and tries to slap Carla, but Carla steps back out of the way. As Carla steps back, Billy trips her up, and Carla falls to the floor, hitting her head hard on the table as she falls down. While Carla is lying on the floor, Andrew kicks her, breaking her ribs and causing internal injury. Andrew and Billy then walk away. It is five minutes before Carla is found by another waiter. An ambulance is called, but by the time it arrives, Carla is dead.

Advise Andrew and Billy.

Answer: Carla: Spilling soup upon someone could be considered as battery. This is defined in s39 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 as intentionally or recklessly inflicting unlawful personal violence upon the victim....


Read more of the answer →

Details: - Mark: 78% | Course: Criminal Law | Year: 1st | Words: 1223 | References: No | Date written: November, 2016 | Date submitted: December 06, 2017 | Coursework ID: 1040

Question: Critically discuss whether prerogative powers exercised by ministers should be codified in statute, with reference to Triggering Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union.

Answer: Historically, prerogative powers were officially held by the Queen, but since the Glorious Revolution of 1688, these powers were exercised by Parliament. Although there is no complete list of these prerogative powers,...


Read more of the answer →

Details: - Mark: 62% | Course: Constitutional and Administrative Law | Year: 1st | Words: 1997 | References: No | Date written: November, 2016 | Date submitted: December 06, 2017 | Coursework ID: 1039

Question: “The court of appeal’s case law as to when it may depart from its own precedents is in disarray.” Discuss.

Answer: To analyse the disarray in the case-law of the Court of Appeal (CA), important decisions such as Young v Bristol Aeroplane Co Ltd , Davis and Johnson , Farrell v Alexander ,...


Read more of the answer →

Details: - Mark: 64% | Course: English Legal System | Year: 1st | Words: 1598 | References: Yes | Date written: March, 2017 | Date submitted: November 27, 2017 | Coursework ID: 1038

Question: “The European Council and the Council of Ministers are the best way to ensure democracy in the EU.” Do you agree? Illustrate your answer with examples.

Answer: The issue is whether the Council of Ministers (the Council) and European Council (EC) are the best way to ensure democracy in the European Union (EU). To determine this, the essay will...


Read more of the answer →

Details: - Mark: 78% | Course: European Union Law | Year: 1st | Words: 1489 | References: Yes | Date written: March, 2017 | Date submitted: November 27, 2017 | Coursework ID: 1037

Question: To what extent is the decision in Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] AC 562 still important to the duty of care in the law of negligence?

Answer: To address the value of Donoghue v Stevenson as precedent for the present-day duty of care, it should be explored what the state of the law was before the case, how it...


Read more of the answer →

Details: - Mark: 64% | Course: Tort Law | Year: 1st | Words: 1498 | References: Yes | Date written: December, 2016 | Date submitted: November 27, 2017 | Coursework ID: 1036

All categories of law coursework

New user?

Registering is fast
and easy

Welcome back

Gain access

  1. Register with us
  2. Pay for instant access
  3. Or submit 3 pieces
    of your work for
    free access

Categories

Adobe Reader is required to access all coursework & essays. (pdf)
PayPal handles payments on our behalf. All major credit cards and currencies accepted.
A PayPal account is not nessesary.