Official CLAT 2027 Mock Test Legal Reasoning Questions With Answers From November 10 Test By NLU Consortium

CLAT Official Mock Test 2027: Legal Reasoning at a Glance

CLAT 2027 Official Mock Test Solutions: Legal Reasoning

Passage I. 

A writ is a public law remedy. It refers to a formal, written order issued by a judicial authority directing an individual or authority to do or refrain from doing an act. The High Court, while exercising its power of judicial review, does not act as an appellate body. It is concerned with illegality, irrationality and procedural impropriety of an order passed by the State or a Statutory Authority. A High Court is empowered to issue directions, orders or writs for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights and for any other purpose. The writ jurisdiction of the High Court is discretionary and equitable. Writ of mandamus is issued by a court commanding a public authority to perform a public duty belonging to its office. It can be issued only when a legal duty is imposed on the authority, and the petitioner has the right to compel the performance of such duty. A writ of mandamus is requested to be issued, inter alia to compel performance of public duties which may be administrative, ministerial or statutory in nature. A writ of mandamus may be issued in favour of a person who establishes a legal right in himself. It may be issued against a person who has a mandatory legal duty to perform, but has failed or has neglected to do so. Such a legal duty emanates by operation of law. The writ of mandamus is most extensive in regard to its remedial nature. The object of mandamus is to prevent disorder emanating from failure of justice and is required to be granted in all cases where law has established no specific remedy. 

Q56. The government of a state made a rule to make it discretionary to grant dearness allowance to its employees. One of the employees filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus to compel the government to grant dearness allowance. In the given situation, which of the following statements is true?

(a) Writ of mandamus cannot be granted as no legal duty was imposed on the government to grant dearness allowance. 

(b) Writ of mandamus cannot be granted as a statutory right was conferred on the employee to receive dearness allowance 

(c) Writ of mandamus can be granted as ii a public law remedy. 

(d) Writ of mandamus can be granted as it is a discretionary remedy.

• Answer: (a) Writ of mandamus cannot be granted as no legal duty was imposed on the government to grant dearness allowance.

• Legal Rationale: Per the passage, mandamus is issued only when a legal duty is imposed on the authority, and the petitioner has a right to compel its performance. Because the rule made dearness allowance discretionary, the employee has no enforceable legal right, and the government has no mandatory duty.

  • (b) is wrong because the rule conferred no statutory right on the employee.

  • (c) is wrong because mandamus, being a public law remedy, does not by itself justify issuing it.

  • (d) is wrong because mandamus is not granted merely because it is a discretionary remedy. A legal duty must exist first.

Q57. A public-spirited citizen filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus to compel the government to make a law to curb the ill effects of climate change. In the given situation, which of the following statements is true? 

(a) Writ of mandamus can be granted as it is an equitable remedy. 

(b) Writ of mandamus cannot be granted, as no legal duty is imposed on the government to pass a law to curb the ill effects of climate change 

(c) Writ of mandamus can be granted as it is a discretionary remedy. 

(d) Writ of mandamus cannot be granted as there is no violation of a fundamental right.

• Answer: (b) Writ of mandamus cannot be granted as no legal duty is imposed on the government to pass a law to curb the ill effects of climate change.

• Legal Rationale: Mandamus compels performance of an existing legal duty, and courts cannot enforce a duty on the government to legislate. Making law is a legislative function, and courts do not direct the legislature or executive to enact legislation (see Supreme Court Employees’ Welfare Association v. Union of India, 1989).

  • (a) and (c) are wrong because the equitable or discretionary nature of the remedy cannot create a missing legal duty.

  • (d) is the weaker choice. The right to a healthy environment has been read into Article 21, and Article 226 writs are not limited to Fundamental Rights. The decisive reason is the absence of a duty to legislate, which the passage lays down as the test.

Q58. Mr. A and Mr. B are parties to a contract of sale of goods. Upon breach of contractual obligations by Mr. A, Mr. B filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus to compel Mr. A to perform his obligations under the contract. In the given situation, which of the following statements is true? 

(a) Writ of mandamus can be granted as it is a discretionary remedy. 

(b) Writ of mandamus cannot be granted as there is no violation of a fundamental right. 

 (c) Writ of mandamus cannot be granted as Mr. B's right under the contract is a private right 

(d) Writ of mandamus can be granted as there is no statutory duty imposed on Mr. A to fulfil his contractual obligations

• Answer: (c) Writ of mandamus cannot be granted as Mr. B’s right under the contract is a private right.

• Legal Rationale: Per the passage, mandamus is a public law remedy issued to compel a public authority to perform a public duty. Mr. A is a private party, and Mr. B’s right arises from a private contract. The remedy for breach is a civil suit for specific performance or damages, not a writ.

  • (a) is wrong because discretion cannot create a public duty where none exists.

  • (b) is wrong as reasoned. The passage says the High Court can issue writs for Fundamental Rights “and for any other purpose”, so the absence of a Fundamental Right violation is not the real ground.

  • (d) is wrong because the missing statutory duty is a reason to refuse the writ, not to grant it. It reaches the opposite conclusion.

Q59. A licensing officer is under a statutory duty to issue a license to an applicant who fulfils the conditions prescribed for the issue of such license. Mr. X, an applicant, fulfilled all the conditions prescribed for the issue of such license, but his application for issuance of license was rejected by the licensing officer. In the given situation, which of the following statements is correct? 

(a) Writ of mandamus can be granted compelling the licensing officer to issue the license 

(b) Writ of mandamus cannot be granted compelling the licensing officer to issue the license, as there is no Violation of fundamental rights 

(c) Writ of mandamus can be granted as it is the discretion of the licensing officer to grant a license 

(d) Writ of mandamus cannot be granted compelling the licensing officer to issue the license as there is no violation of public duty

• Answer: (a) Writ of mandamus can be granted compelling the license officer to issue the license.

• Legal Rationale: The officer has a statutory duty to issue the license to an applicant who meets the prescribed conditions, and Mr. X met them. The petitioner has a legal right to compel performance, so the passage’s conditions for mandamus are satisfied. A refusal despite this duty is a failure to perform a public duty.

  • (b) is wrong because a fundamental rights violation is not a precondition for mandamus.

  • (c) is wrong because the officer has no discretion to refuse once the conditions are met. The duty is mandatory.

  • (d) is wrong because refusing to perform a statutory duty is itself a breach of public duty.

Q60. Which of the following statements is incorrect? 

(a) Writ of mandamus may be issued in favour of a person who establishes the existence of a legal right 

(b) Writ of mandamus may be issued against a person or authority who has a mandatory duty to perform but has failed or has neglected to do so.

(c) Writ of mandamus is purported to prevent disorder emanating from failure of justice. 

(d) Writ of mandamus may be requested to be issued to compel performance of private duties which may be administrative, ministerial or statutory in nature.

• Answer: (d) Writ of mandamus may be requested to be issued to compel performance of private duties which may be administrative, ministerial or statutory in nature.

• Legal Rationale: The passage says mandamus is requested to compel performance of public duties which may be administrative, ministerial or statutory in nature. Option (d) replaces “public” with “private”, so it is the incorrect statement. A writ cannot compel private duties (see Q58).

  • (a) is correct because the passage says mandamus may issue in favour of a person who establishes a legal right in himself.

  • (b) is correct because the passage says it may issue against a person who has a mandatory legal duty but has failed or neglected to perform it.

  • (c) is correct because the passage says the object of mandamus is to prevent disorder emanating from failure of justice.

Passage II

A person is negligent when they fail to take the care that a reasonable person would take in the circumstances, and that failure causes foreseeable harm to another. A duty of care arises where the relationship between the parties and the circumstances make it reasonably foreseeable that the defendant’s conduct may cause harm to the claimant. The claimant must establish that the defendant breached this duty and that the breach was a factual and legal cause of the injury. A person is not required to guard against every imaginable risk. The standard is that of a reasonable person, taking account of the likelihood and seriousness of harm and the practical steps available to avoid it. Where the claimant’s own lack of reasonable care contributes to the harm, the damages may be reduced proportionately. However, a defendant is not liable for harm that is too remote or not reasonably foreseeable.

Q61. A shopkeeper leaves a wet floor without any warning. A customer slips and is injured. Which principle most directly supports the customer’s claim? 

(a) The shopkeeper owes no duty to visitors 

(b) Failure to take reasonable care may amount to negligence 

(c) All accidents create strict liability 20 

(d) The customer must prove deliberate harm

• Answer: (b) Failure to take reasonable care may amount to negligence.

• Legal Rationale: The passage defines negligence as failing to take the care a reasonable person would take in the circumstances, where that failure causes foreseeable harm. A shopkeeper owes a duty of care to visitors, and leaving a wet floor without any warning is a failure to take reasonable care. A slip and injury is the foreseeable result.

  • (a) is wrong because the relationship between the shopkeeper and the customer gives rise to a duty of care under the passage.

  • (c) is wrong because the passage is built on fault-based liability (breach of duty), not strict liability.

  • (d) is wrong because negligence does not require deliberate harm. It turns on a lack of reasonable care.

Q62. A driver takes reasonable precautions, but an unforeseeable object suddenly falls onto the road, causing a collision. Under the passage, the driver is: 

(a) Automatically negligent 

(b) Liable for every consequence 

(c) Not necessarily negligent because the risk may not have been foreseeable 

(d) Liable only because injury occurred

• Answer: (c) Not necessarily negligent because the risk may not have been foreseeable.

• Legal Rationale: The passage says a person is not required to guard against every imaginable risk, and a defendant is not liable for harm that is too remote or not reasonably foreseeable. The driver took reasonable precautions, and the falling object was unforeseeable. Negligence therefore cannot be presumed, though the answer says “not necessarily” because the facts could still show a breach.

  • (a) is wrong because negligence is never automatic. The claimant must prove breach and causation.

  • (b) is wrong because the passage limits liability to foreseeable harm, not every consequence.

  • (d) is wrong because the occurrence of injury alone does not create liability. A breach of the duty of care is required.

Q63. A pedestrian carelessly crosses the road and is struck by a speeding driver. The pedestrian’s conduct contributed to the injury. What may follow? 

(a) The driver is always absolved 

(b) Damages may be reduced proportionately 

(c) The pedestrian cannot sue 

(d) The driver must pay punitive damages

• Answer: (b) Damages may be reduced proportionately.

• Legal Rationale: The passage says that where the claimant’s own lack of reasonable care contributes to the harm, the damages may be reduced proportionately. The pedestrian’s careless crossing contributed to the injury, and the speeding driver was also at fault. This is contributory negligence, which reduces damages rather than barring the claim.

  • (a) is wrong because the driver is not absolved. The passage reduces damages but does not remove liability.

  • (c) is wrong because the pedestrian’s own fault does not bar the claim.

  • (d) is wrong because the passage says nothing about punitive damages. It speaks only of proportionate reduction.

Q64. A person leaves a heavy flowerpot precariously on a balcony above a busy footpath. It falls and injures a passer-by. The harm is: 

(a) Likely foreseeable

(b) Always too remote 

(c) Not legally relevant 

(d) Only a contractual loss

• Answer: (a) Likely foreseeable.

• Legal Rationale: The passage makes liability depend on whether harm was reasonably foreseeable. A heavy flowerpot left precariously on a balcony above a busy footpath can easily fall and hurt someone below. A reasonable person would foresee this, and the likelihood and seriousness of the harm are both high, so the passage treats it as foreseeable.

  • (b) is wrong because the passage excludes only harm that is too remote, and this harm is neither far-fetched nor improbable.

  • (c) is wrong because foreseeability is central to a negligence claim under the passage.

  • (d) is wrong because there is no contract between the person and the passer-by. The claim arises in tort.

Q65. Which is necessary for a negligence claim as described in the passage? 

(a) Proof of a duty, breach and causally connected foreseeable harm 

(b) Proof that the defendant intended the injury 

(c) Proof of a written contract 

(d) Proof that the claimant was entirely without fault

• Answer: (a) Proof of a duty, breach, and causally connected foreseeable harm.

• Legal Rationale: The passage says the claimant must establish that a duty of care arose, that the defendant breached it, and that the breach was a factual and legal cause of foreseeable injury. Option (a) states these elements together.

  • (b) is wrong because negligence does not require intent. It turns on a failure to take reasonable care.

  • (c) is wrong because a duty of care can arise from the relationship between the parties and the circumstances, without any contract.

  • (d) is wrong because the passage allows a claim even where the claimant is partly at fault, since damages are only reduced proportionately.

Passage III

A contract is formed when one party makes a definite offer and the other accepts it unconditionally. An offer must show an intention to be bound if accepted; a mere invitation to negotiate is not an offer. Acceptance must correspond with the terms of the offer and must be communicated to the offeror, unless the offer dispenses with communication or the law recognises a particular mode of acceptance. An offer may be revoked any time before acceptance becomes complete against the offeror, provided the revocation is communicated to the offeree. A counter-offer generally rejects the original offer and proposes new terms. Silence ordinarily does not amount to acceptance. Where an offer prescribes a method of acceptance, that method should be followed, unless the offeror waives the requirement or accepts another method.

Q66. A advertises a laptop “for sale, interested buyers may contact me.” This is generally: 

(a) A completed contract 

(b) An invitation to negotiate 

(c) An unconditional acceptance 

(d) A counter-offer

• Answer: (b) An invitation to negotiate.

• Legal Rationale: The passage says an offer must show an intention to be bound if accepted, and that a mere invitation to negotiate is not an offer. “For sale, interested buyers may contact me” only invites interested people to approach A and does not fix terms A is ready to be bound by.

  • (a) is wrong because no offer has been accepted, so no contract is formed.

  • (c) is wrong because acceptance requires an existing offer and a response to it, and none has happened here.

  • (d) is wrong because a counter-offer needs an original offer to respond to.

Q67. A offers to sell a book to B for ₹500. B replies, “I accept, provided you deliver it tomorrow.” B’s reply is: 

(a) An unconditional acceptance 

(b) Silence 

(c) A counter-offer 

(d) A revocation by A

• Answer: (c) A counter-offer.

• Legal Rationale: The passage says acceptance must be unconditional and must correspond with the terms of the offer. B’s “I accept, provided you deliver it tomorrow” adds a new condition, so it rejects the original offer and proposes new terms. That is a counter-offer.

  • (a) is wrong because the added condition makes the acceptance conditional.

  • (b) is wrong because B has replied with new terms, so B is not silent.

  • (d) is wrong because revocation is an act of the offeror, and here it is B, the offeree, who is replying.

Q68. A sends an offer to B. Before B accepts, A communicates a revocation. B then sends acceptance. What is the result? 

(a) A contract necessarily exists 

(b) The revocation is ineffective in every case 

(c) No contract is formed because the offer was revoked before acceptance 

(d) B’s acceptance revives the offer automatically

• Answer: (c) No contract is formed because the offer was revoked before acceptance.

• Legal Rationale: The passage says an offer may be revoked any time before acceptance becomes complete, provided the revocation is communicated to the offeree. A communicated its revocation before B accepted, so the offer had ended and nothing remained for B to accept.

  • (a) is wrong because a contract needs a live offer at the time of acceptance.

  • (b) is wrong because the revocation is effective here, since it was communicated before acceptance.

  • (d) is wrong because a lapsed offer cannot be revived by a later acceptance. At most, B’s message would be a fresh offer that A is free to accept or reject.

Q69. A offers goods to B, and states acceptance must be by email. B emails unconditional acceptance. The contract is: 
(a) Generally formed by communicated acceptance 

(b) Invalid because acceptance must be in person 

(c) Formed only when payment is made 

(d) Not formed because email is not communication

• Answer: (a) Generally formed by communicated acceptance.

• Legal Rationale: The passage says an offer may prescribe a method of acceptance, and that method should be followed. A prescribed email, and B accepted unconditionally by email, so the prescribed method was followed. Acceptance was also communicated to the offeror, so the contract is generally formed.

  • (b) is wrong because the offer asked for email, not for acceptance in person.

  • (c) is wrong because payment is not a condition of formation under the passage.

  • (d) is wrong because email is a valid means of communicating acceptance, and here it is the very method prescribed.

Q70. A sends B an offer. B says nothing, but A assumes B accepted. Under the passage: 

(a) Silence ordinarily does not amount to acceptance 

(b) A contract always forms through silence 

(c) B must pay damages 

(d) The offer becomes irrevocable

• Answer: (a) Silence ordinarily does not amount to acceptance.

• Legal Rationale: The passage says silence ordinarily does not amount to acceptance. A offered, B said nothing, and A cannot assume B accepted, so no contract is formed.

  • (b) is wrong because silence does not always form a contract. The passage says “ordinarily”.

  • (c) is wrong because B has made no contract and so has breached nothing.

  • (d) is wrong because the passage says an offer may be revoked at any time before acceptance is complete, and B’s silence is not acceptance.

Passage IV

Defamation occurs when a person publishes a false statement of fact concerning another person that harms that person’s reputation. Publication means that the statement is communicated to at least one person other than the subject. A statement that is merely an opinion, or that is substantially true, may not satisfy the basic elements of defamation. The law recognises certain defences. A truthful statement is generally a defence. Fair comment or honest opinion on a matter of public interest may also be protected where it is based on facts and not made with malice. Some communications made in particular settings, such as statements during judicial proceedings, may enjoy privilege. The purpose of these rules is to balance protection of reputation with freedom of expression.

Q71. A falsely tells a neighbour that B stole money, and the neighbour believes it. This may constitute: 

(a) Defamation, because a false reputational statement was published to a third party 

(b) No defamation because it was spoken privately 

(c) Defamation only if printed in a newspaper 

(d) A contract

• Answer: (a) Defamation, because a false reputational statement was published to a third party.

• Legal Rationale: The passage requires a false statement of fact about another person that harms their reputation, published to at least one person other than the subject. A told a neighbour, a third party, that B stole money. That is a false statement of fact, it harms B’s reputation, and the neighbour believed it. These are the basic elements of defamation.

  • (b) is wrong because the passage defines publication as communication to at least one other person, and speaking to the neighbour satisfies that. Defamation covers spoken words as well as written ones.

  • (c) is wrong because the passage does not limit defamation to printed matter. Publication to any third party is enough.

  • (d) is wrong because a contract is unrelated to what happened. This is a tort claim.

Q72. A writes a substantially true report about a public official’s conduct. On the passage’s principles, truth is: 

(a) Never relevant 

(b) Generally a defence 

(c) Automatically malicious 

(d) A form of publication without a statement

• Answer: (b) Generally a defence.

• Legal Rationale: The passage says a truthful statement is generally a defence, and that a substantially true statement may not satisfy the basic elements of defamation. A’s report about the official’s conduct is substantially true, so truth generally defeats the claim.

  • (a) is wrong because truth is directly relevant under the passage.

  • (c) is wrong because truth is not automatically malicious. Under the passage, malice bears on the protection of fair comment, not on the defence of truth.

  • (d) is wrong because truth is a defence and not a form of publication. A written report is itself the publication.

Q73. C tells only B, “You are incompetent,” as a personal opinion, with no factual assertion. This is: 

(a) Necessarily defamation 

(b) Potentially outside the basic definition because it is opinion 

(c) A criminal contract 

(d) Defamation because it is private

• Answer: (b) Potentially outside the basic definition because it is opinion.

• Legal Rationale: The passage says a statement that is merely an opinion may not satisfy the basic elements of defamation, which require a false statement of fact. C’s remark, “You are incompetent” is a personal opinion with no factual assertion. C also said it only to B, so there was no publication to a third party.

  • (a) is wrong because defamation is not necessary here. The statement is opinion, and there is no publication.

  • (c) is wrong because “a criminal contract” has no connection to the facts.

  • (d) is wrong because privacy does not make a statement defamatory. Communication only to the subject is not publication under the passage.

Q74. A person posts a false statement about D on a public social-media page. The statement is seen by others. The element of publication is: 

(a) Absent because it is online 

(b) Satisfied because others received the statement 

(c) Satisfied only if D replies 

(d) Absent unless a newspaper repeats it

• Answer: (b) Satisfied because others received the statement.

• Legal Rationale: The passage defines publication as communication of the statement to at least one person other than the subject. The false statement about D was posted on a public social-media page and seen by others, so it was communicated to third parties. The medium does not matter.

  • (a) is wrong because the passage does not exclude online communication.

  • (c) is wrong because D’s reply is not needed. Publication is complete once a third party receives the statement.

  • (d) is wrong because the option is cut off in your screenshot, but it reads “Absent unless a newspaper repeats it”. Publication does not depend on a newspaper repeating the statement.

Q75. The rules on defamation seek to balance: 

(a) Property rights and taxation 

(b) Reputation and freedom of expression 

(c) Contract and criminal procedure 

(d) Privacy and election rules only

• Answer: (b) Reputation and freedom of expression.

• Legal Rationale: The last line of Passage IV says the purpose of the defamation rules is to balance protection of reputation with freedom of expression.

  • (a), (c) and (d) are wrong because property rights, taxation, contract, criminal procedure, privacy and election rules are not what the passage says the rules balance.

Passage V

A consumer is entitled to protection against goods and services that are defective, deficient or offered through unfair trade practices. A trade practice may be unfair where it uses a misleading representation about the quality, standard, price or benefits of a product, or makes a false claim that a product has a particular approval or performance. A consumer who suffers loss because of a defect, deficiency or unfair practice may seek an appropriate remedy through the consumer dispute redressal mechanism. The remedy may include repair, replacement, refund, compensation or discontinuance of the unfair practice, depending on the facts and applicable law. A seller’s mere claim that “the customer should have checked” does not by itself remove responsibility for a misleading representation. At the same time, a consumer must establish the relevant purchase or service relationship and the basis of the complaint.

Q76. A seller advertises a phone as having 256 GB storage, but it actually has 64 GB. This is most likely: 

(a) A misleading representation 

(b) A fair trade practice 

(c) A private opinion 

(d) A valid disclaimer

• Answer: (a) A misleading representation.

• Legal Rationale: The passage says a trade practice may be unfair where it uses a misleading representation about the quality, standard, price, or benefits of a product. Advertising 256 GB when the phone has 64 GB misstates its quality and specifications, so it is a misleading representation.

  • (b) is wrong because a false claim about the product is an unfair trade practice, not a fair one.

  • (c) is wrong because storage capacity is a verifiable fact, not a matter of opinion.

  • (d) is wrong because the passage does not treat a disclaimer as a cure for a false representation.

Q77. A consumer receives a defective mixer and proves the purchase. Which remedy may be appropriate under the passage?

(a) Only imprisonment of the seller

(b) Repair, replacement or refund, depending on the facts

(c) No remedy if the product was advertised

(d) Only a public apology

• Answer: (b) Repair, replacement or refund, depending on the facts.

• Legal Rationale: The passage says a consumer who suffers loss because of a defect may seek an appropriate remedy, which may include repair, replacement, refund, compensation or discontinuance of the unfair practice, depending on the facts and applicable law. The consumer here has proved the purchase, so the relationship is established.

  • (a) is wrong because the passage lists civil remedies and does not mention imprisonment.

  • (c) is wrong because advertising a product does not remove the right to a remedy for a defect.

  • (d) is wrong because the passage does not limit relief to a public apology.

Q78. A company falsely claims its product has government approval. This may be:
(a) An unfair trade practice
(b) A lawful marketing method in all cases
(c) A defect only if the package is damaged
(d) Unrelated to consumer protection

• Answer: (a) An unfair trade practice.

• Legal Rationale: The passage says a trade practice may be unfair where it makes a false claim that a product has a particular approval or performance. A false claim of government approval is exactly such a claim.

  • (b) is wrong because a false claim is not lawful marketing.

  • (c) is wrong because the unfairness lies in the false claim, not in any damage to the package.

  • (d) is wrong because protection against unfair trade practices is the subject of the passage.

Q79. The seller argues that the buyer should have independently verified the advertisement. Under the passage, this argument:
(a) Automatically defeats the complaint
(b) Does not by itself remove responsibility for a misleading claim
(c) Makes the contract void in every case
(d) Proves that no representation was made

• Answer: (b) Does not by itself remove responsibility for a misleading claim.

• Legal Rationale: The passage says a seller’s mere claim that “the customer should have checked” does not by itself remove responsibility for a misleading representation.

  • (a) is wrong because the argument does not automatically defeat the complaint.

  • (c) is wrong because the passage says nothing about the contract being void.

  • (d) is wrong because asking the buyer to verify an advertisement concedes that a representation was made.

Q80. A consumer complaint should establish:
(a) Only that the seller is wealthy
(b) The purchase or service relationship and basis of the complaint
(c) That the product was popular
(d) That the consumer never used the product

• Answer: (b) The purchase or service relationship and basis of the complaint.

• Legal Rationale: The passage says a consumer must establish the relevant purchase or service relationship and the basis of the complaint.

  • (a) is wrong because the seller’s wealth is irrelevant to the complaint.

  • (c) is wrong because the product’s popularity does not matter.

  • (d) is wrong because the complaint does not depend on the consumer never having used the product. A consumer who bought and used a defective product can still complain.

Passage VI

A person may use reasonable force to protect their body or property against an unlawful threat. The right of private defence is preventive, not punitive: its purpose is to stop or avert harm, not to punish an attacker after the danger has passed. The force used must be proportionate to the threat and the circumstances as reasonably perceived at the time. The right may arise even when a person is unable to seek immediate help from public authorities. However, it does not permit unlimited violence. If the threat ends, continued force is not justified. A person who provokes an attack may have a restricted claim to private defence, depending on the circumstances. The assessment considers the immediacy of the threat, the nature of the danger and whether the response was reasonably necessary.

Q81. A is attacked with a stick and uses reasonable force to stop the attacker. The action is: 

(a) Potentially justified as private defence 

(b) Punishment after the event 

(c) Always unlawful 

(d) Justified only if the attacker is arrested

• Answer: (a) Potentially justified as private defence.

• Legal Rationale: The passage says a person may use reasonable force to protect their body or property against an unlawful threat. A was attacked with a stick and used reasonable force to stop the attacker. The force was aimed at stopping the harm, so the action is potentially justified.

  • (b) is wrong because private defence is preventive, not punitive, and A acted during the attack.

  • (c) is wrong because the passage permits reasonable force against an unlawful threat, so the action is not always unlawful.

  • (d) is wrong because the passage does not require the attacker to be arrested. The test is the immediacy of the threat and the reasonableness of the response.

Q82. An attacker retreats and the danger has ended. A then continues to beat the attacker. This is:
(a) Clearly within private defence
(b) Not justified because the threat has passed
(c) Always proportionate
(d) Required by law

• Answer: (b) Not justified because the threat has passed.

• Legal Rationale: The passage says that if the threat ends, continued force is not justified, and that private defence aims to stop harm, not to punish an attacker after the danger has passed. Once the attacker retreated, the danger had ended, and A’s continued beating was punishment.

  • (a) is wrong because the right ended with the threat.

  • (c) is wrong because force used after the danger has passed cannot be proportionate to a threat that no longer exists.

  • (d) is wrong because the passage does not impose any legal duty to continue force.

Q83. A responds to a minor shove with deadly force. Under the passage, the response is likely:
(a) Proportionate in every case
(b) Reasonable because any force is permitted
(c) Disproportionate to the threat
(d) Preventive by definition

• Answer: (c) Disproportionate to the threat.

• Legal Rationale: The passage says the force used must be proportionate to the threat and the circumstances as reasonably perceived at the time, and that the right does not permit unlimited violence. Deadly force against a minor shove is out of proportion to the threat.

  • (a) is wrong because proportionality depends on the facts, and here it is plainly absent.

  • (b) is wrong because the passage allows only reasonable force, not any force.

  • (d) is wrong because the response is not preventive merely by label. Its force must be proportionate to the threat.

Q84. The purpose of private defence is to: 

(a) Punish wrongdoing 

(b) Avert or stop harm 

(c) Replace criminal courts 

(d) Recover compensation

• Answer: (b) Avert or stop harm.

• Legal Rationale: The passage says private defence is preventive, not punitive, and that its purpose is to stop or avert harm.

  • (a) is wrong because the passage says the right is not meant to punish.

  • (c) is wrong because the passage does not treat private defence as a substitute for criminal courts. It only recognises that the right may arise when public help is not immediately available.

  • (d) is wrong because the passage does not mention compensation as its purpose.

Q85. Which factor is relevant to assessing private defence? 

(a) The immediacy and nature of the threat 

(b) The attacker’s wealth 

(c) The victim’s occupation only 

(d) Whether the incident was filmed

• Answer: (a) The immediacy and nature of the threat.

• Legal Rationale: The passage says the assessment considers the immediacy of the threat, the nature of the danger, and whether the response was reasonably necessary.

  • (b) is wrong because the attacker’s wealth has no bearing on the assessment.

  • (c) is wrong because the victim’s occupation is not among the factors in the passage.

  • (d) is wrong because whether the incident was filmed is not a factor the passage mentions.