Ch.

2: Qs 2
2. Where do we look to predict the outcome of a legal dispute:

a. in a common law system?

To predict the outcome of a legal dispute in a common law system need to look to precedent-making
cases.

b. in a civil law system?

To predict the outcome of legal dispute in a civil law system need to look at the central civil code

Ch. 2: Qs 5
Describe the advantages and the disadvantages of the doctrine of stare decisis.

Advantages

Doctrine of stare decisis Provides both predictability and stability for the legal system, also by that there
is no need to go to the court to find out how the law will be applied in a situation. Also can save time
and cost of going to court in a situation you see in the past precedent was set and you would not win.

Also allows lawyers to predict the likely outcome of a particular legal question by looking at what has
been decided before.

Disadvantage

a significant disadvantage is that a judge must follow another judge’s decision even though social
attitudes may have changed.

Another disadvantage is the courts can distinguish cases which can lead to some distorted applications
(false or wrong). The certainty mentioned can be rigid.

Ch. 3: Qs 2
Distinguish between negotiation, mediation, and arbitration; discuss the advantages and disadvantages
of each of them:

Negotiation is when both parties communicate directly to each other or through their lawyers. Skill and
experience is an asset here, and may compromise the outcome if a party lacks these.

Mediation is when the disputing parties agree on a neutral third party to facilitate the communication.
The mediator hears both sides and has permit to gain the necessary information, suggests areas of
agreement and possible compromise, encourages concessions and helps the parties come to agreement
but do not impose a decision on the parties. it relies on cooperation of the parties. There is no power to
compel disclosure of evidence, and may emphasize the weaker party’s lack of power. It is helpful when
dealing with confidential information, and also lends itself to a speedier and less costly resolution of
disputes. Arbitration often involves

Arbitration is when the disputing parties agree to be bound by the decision of a neutral third party.
Often they select the arbitrator but the person may be determined by a pre-existing contract between
the parties. Parties present all of the information to the arbitrator, who is usually an expert in the matter
in dispute, and who then makes a decision. The parties give control of the matter to the arbitrator.

Negotiation is the simplest and Mediation is the most flexible and arbitration is the less flexible.

Ch. 3: Qs 9
Distinguish between questions of law and questions of fact and explain why this distinction is significant:

Questions of law are always decided by a judge in a court case but questions of fact, a

jury will decide on that. Questions of fact are often used in a serious matter of law, where the

situation is dependent on circumstances or factual situations

Ch. 4: Qs 1
Explain what is meant by the statement “A tort is a civil wrong.”

This means that the action or conduct itself is considered unacceptable behavior, and gives rise to a
private action between individuals whereby a plaintiff can sue a defendant for compensation. This
should be contrasted with a breach of contract, or a criminal act.

Ch. 4: Qs 4
What limitations are there on the right of self-defense when people are defending themselves against
an attack?

People being physically attacked are only permitted to use as much force as is necessary or reasonable
force, to defend themselves. If excessive force is used it constitutes an assault or battery

Ch. 5: Qs 1
List and explain what a plaintiff must establish to succeed in a negligence action.

The plaintiff must establish a duty of care was owed, which can be determined using the reasonable
foreseeability test to see if the defendant was obligated to exercise caution or care. They must also
establish the other party committed a breach of duty of that duty of care which a reasonable and
prudent person would not do. Negligence claims must prove four things in court: duty, breach,
causation, and damages/harm. Generally speaking, when someone acts in a careless way and causes an
injury to another person, under the legal principle of "negligence" the careless person will be legally
liable for any resulting harm

Ch. 5: Qs 5
Explain how the adoption of the Anns case test by the Supreme Court of Canada modified the
approach to duty of care established in Donoghue v. Stevenson

The Anns case added a second part to the test. The first part is a re-statement of the test from
Donoghue v. Stevenson. The second part asks if there is any reason the duty should not be imposed, or
should it be reduced or restricted in some way. The courts are trying to avoid indeterminate liability for
new areas of negligence.

Ch. 6: Qs 2
List and explain the elements that must be present for an agreement to qualify as a valid contract

The requisite elements that must be established to demonstrate the formation of a legally binding

contract are the below:

offer, acceptance, consideration, mutuality of obligation, Legally Competent Parties, Reality of Consent,
Legal Purpose

Ch. 6: Qs 4
Explain the difference between void and voidable. What is a practical result of this difference?

A void contract does not qualify as a legally binding contract but a voidable contract exists and has
legal effect, but one of the parties has the option to end the contract.

A void contract is an agreement that does not meet the tests for validity, and therefore is no contract at
all. A voidable contract is one which initially appears to be valid, but is subject to cancellation by a party
to the contract who is believed to have acted under some kind of disability.
Ch. 7: Qs 7
When can an adult sue a minor in tort even though there is a contract between them?

What constitutes a necessary will vary with the particular needs of a minor and her/his status.

Almost all of the contracts are voidable at the minor's option. If a minor wishes to treat a contract made
with an adult as valid, the adult is bound by it.An adult cannot avoid a contract on the ground that the
minor might avoid it.

Ch. 7: Qs 8
What must an insane or drunk person establish to escape liability under a contract?

The person trying to escape a contract on the basis of drunkenness must also be able to show that, on
reaching sobriety, the contract was repudiated.