PVL3703 Delict MCQ.

1. Which one of the following conditions may amount to automatism? 1. Provocation 2. Self-defence 3. Black-out 4. Necessity Answer: 3. Black Out Note: It is accepted that a black-oPVL3703 Delict MCQ.ut may cause a person to act INVOLUNTARILY. Options 1, 2 and 4 – generally considered as grounds of justification which negate the elements of WRONGFULNESS 2. Choose the correct statement: In Carmichele v Minister of Safety and Security (Centre for Applied Legal Studies Intervening) 2001 (4) SA 938 (CC) the Constitutional Court: 1. declared that the courts of lower instance had erred by applying a pre-constitutional concept of the boni mores. 2. noted that the law of delict admirably reflected the spirit, purport and object of the Bill of Rights. 3. recognised a claim for Constitutional damages. 4. recognised the concept for a Constitutional delict. Answer: 1. declared that the courts of lower instance had erred by applying a pre-constitutional concept of the boni mores. 3. Dr. B, a well-known obstetrician, delivered S’s son, K. During the delivery, the nerves in K’s right shoulder were injured resulting in the paralysis of his arm. All of this happened because Dr. B failed to inform S of the potential complications inherent in delivering a large baby. Indicate the MOST CORRECT statement: Negligence will be determined according to the standard of: 1. the reasonable doctor. 2. the reasonable person. 3. the reasonable man. 4. the reasonable child. Answer: 1. The reasonable doctor. Note: In this scenario the wrongdoer is an expert, therefore the test is adjusted and raised to that of the reasonable expert. 4. M is away on holiday. F, his neighbour, is keeping a watchful eye on his house for him and undertook to take care of M’s cat. F notices that M’s house is on fire and realises that the cat is trapped inside the burning house. F breaks down the front door in order to save the cat. If M wants to institute a delictual action against F for breaking down his front door, F may rely on the following ground of justification: 1. Statutory authority 2. Necessity 3. Provocation 4. Private Defence PVL3703 Delict MCQ. Answer: 2. Necessity Note: In this scenario, the defence of private defence, provocation and statutory authority are not applicable. Necessity exists when the defendant is placed in such a position that he is able to protect an interest (his own legally recognisable interest of that of someone else) only by reasonably violating the interests of another person. 5. D is so offended by W’s speech at a political rally, that he throws an apple at W. W falls off the podium and sustains a broken arm as well as a few broken ribs. He is admitted to hospital. While W is being treated at the hospital, a nurse leaves the windows of the ward open and W contracts pneumonia. Which one of the following is INCORRECT? 1. D acted wrongfully. 2. D had fault. 3. There is a factual causal link between D’s conduct and W’s pneumonia. 4. There is a legal causal link between D’s conduct and W’s pneumonia. Answer: 4. There is a legal causal link between D’s conduct and W’s pneumonia Note: Emphasis on INCORRECT STATEMENT. D di act wrongfully when he threw an apple and he had fault (intention) when he directed the apple at W. D’s conduct has a factual causal link to W’s broken arm, broken ribs and pneumonia. To determine factual causation, the condition sine qua non theory (also known as the ‘but for’ test) is applied. With regards to W contracting pneumonia, D’s intentional wrongful conduct was the factual cause but not the legal cause. The nurse’s conduct may be considered a novus actus interveniens. 6. The most suitable remedy for the prevention of harm is: 1. the actio legis Aquiliae. 2. the actio de effuses vel deiectis. 3. the interdict. 4. mitigation of loss. Answer: 3. The interdict Note: The interdict is directed at the prevention of a wrongful act (impending wrongful act or to prevent the continuation of a wrongful act that has already commenced) and is therefore the most suitable remedy. It has a preventative function and as a result there is no need for the requirement of fault on the part of the wrongdoer to be present. The requirements that need to be met for the granting of an interdict are: there must be an act by the respondent, the act must be wrongful and no other ordinary remedy which would prevent the wrongful conduct must be available. 7. The principle dictating that all past and prospective loss must be claimed together stemming from a single cause of action, is known as: 1. the sum-formula approach. 2. the ‘once and for all’ rule. 3. compensating advantages. 4. the concrete approach to damage. Answer: 2. the ‘once and for all’ rule. Note: The ‘once and for all’ rule expresses that in all claims for compensation and satisfaction arising out of delict the plaintiff must claim damages for all damage already sustained and all future damages insofar as the claims are based on a single cause of action. 8. Which is the odd one out?