[aau98113]

The question on standard of care related to the breach of duty of care. See question and answer 3 of the June 2008 paper. I got that completely wrong. as I talked about neighbourhood principle etc.. Really annoying as I knew the answer. Why do they have to make questions ambiguous. I should have looked at those past exam papers!! Hopefully did okay in other questions[/quote]

I disagree actually, I think you are OK with what you did. At least I hope so because I did same thing

I’m sure the question was asking about duty of care and not about breach of that duty of care

The question and answer you have linked to is all about the breach which we werent asked this year. The 2008 model answer even starts with “Once a clainmant has established that the defendant owes them a duty of care they must then establish that the defendent has actually breached that duty..” and goes onto talk about the breach rather than the duty

Our question today was about establishing the duty of care in the first place i.e. neighbour principle

[aau98113]

I have a question re the Ari, Bi, Cas, Dex question on failure to pay outstanding debts in full but need to know if anyone else did the Scots variation of this paper?

The BPP Scots Supplement Notes said that for Chapter 5 we only needed to study sections 4 and 5. That means we were advised not to study the part payment or alternative consideration rules that I’ve seen other people discuss on here as being in their answer

I’m guessing that means it is not applicable in Scotland so does that mean we just had to say that Bi and Cas repudiated their contracts and that new contracts were formed with Bi and Cas’s father? If Ari then chose to pursue Bi or Cas for the debts he would repudiate these 2 new contracts. i.e. he cant do anything

[Author]

Posts