1. Has the Consumer Protection Act 1987 [CPA] improved the English law of product liability, or would it have been better to retain the previous negligence-based regime for defective products? Discuss with reference to both the CPA and relevant case law.
2. Critically evaluate the main characteristics of the contributory negligence defence. How should the defence of contributory negligence relate, if at all, to the defences of volenti non fit injuria (consent) and ex turpi causa non oritur actio (illegality)?
3. “The law determining when there is liability for pure economic loss is an incoherent mess.” Do you agree? Can the cases in this area be explained in a coherent, principled way?
4. Should the tort system be replaced by a loss compensation scheme as in New Zealand? Does tort law serve any important purposes that could not be served by such a scheme?
