New Year Sale 2026! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions
Mail Us support@pass4success.com
Location US
Mob_nav_barsMENU

CIMAPRA17-BA4-1 Exam - Topic 4 Question 73 Discussion

Actual exam question for CIMA's CIMAPRA17-BA4-1 exam
Question #: 73
Topic #: 4
[All CIMAPRA17-BA4-1 Questions]

Which ONE of the following is NOT an essential element of the tort of negligence?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: A, B, C

by Tiera at Aug 10, 2023, 04:25 AM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium CIMAPRA17-BA4-1 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Submit Cancel
Tequila
3 months ago
Duty of care and breach are must-haves, for sure.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lettie
3 months ago
I thought intention was key in negligence cases.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ardella
4 months ago
Wait, so intention isn’t needed? That’s surprising!
upvoted 0 times
...
Barrie
4 months ago
Totally agree, C is the odd one out!
upvoted 0 times
...
Selma
4 months ago
C is definitely not essential.
upvoted 0 times
...
Whitney
4 months ago
I’m a bit confused, though. I thought all elements had to be proven, but maybe intent isn't necessary?
upvoted 0 times
...
Geoffrey
4 months ago
I practiced a similar question where intent was a key factor, and it wasn't part of negligence, so I’m leaning towards C as well.
upvoted 0 times
...
Erasmo
5 months ago
I think option C is the one that doesn't fit because negligence doesn't require intent, just a breach of duty.
upvoted 0 times
...
Brett
5 months ago
I remember that the essential elements of negligence include duty of care and breach, but I'm not sure about the intent part.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jess
5 months ago
Okay, I think I've got a handle on this. The applet is checking the MAC address table and generating some kind of event based on what it finds. I just need to determine the exact behavior.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jeannetta
5 months ago
Hmm, I'm a bit unsure about this one. The question is asking about a lot of specific details that I'm not entirely confident I have a firm grasp on. I'll need to review my notes and examples to make sure I understand the right approach.
upvoted 0 times
...
Linn
5 months ago
The workflows are probably in the FND data, since that's where the application configuration information is stored.
upvoted 0 times
...
Harrison
5 months ago
This seems like a pretty straightforward network optimization question. I'd go with option C - configuring QoS on the network switches to alleviate the bottlenecks.
upvoted 0 times
...
Casie
9 months ago
Wait, so the defendant doesn't Casien need to intend to break the duty of care? That's like saying I can trip and fall on someone and still be liable. Crazy!
upvoted 0 times
...
Vanda
10 months ago
I'd say the answer is C too. Intentionally causing harm is not a requirement for negligence - the defendant just needs to have failed in their duty of care, regardless of their intentions.
upvoted 0 times
Francisca
8 months ago
C) The defendant must have intended to cause physical harm or financial loss to the claimant in breaking the duty of care
upvoted 0 times
...
Devorah
9 months ago
B) The defendant must have acted in breach of the duty of care
upvoted 0 times
...
Jame
9 months ago
A) The defendant must owe the claimant a legal duty of care
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Gayla
10 months ago
Haha, this is like a legal version of 'Which one of these things is not like the other?' I'm gonna go with C, it seems the most out of place.
upvoted 0 times
Cheryl
8 months ago
Exactly, it's more about the actions and consequences rather than the intent.
upvoted 0 times
...
Shay
8 months ago
Yeah, that's right. Negligence is about failing to meet the standard of care, not necessarily intending harm.
upvoted 0 times
...
Boris
8 months ago
C) is correct. It's not necessary for the defendant to have intended to cause harm.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lavina
8 months ago
D) The defendant must have caused some damage, loss or injury to the claimant by breaking the duty of care
upvoted 0 times
...
Deonna
8 months ago
C) The defendant must have intended to cause physical harm or financial loss to the claimant in breaking the duty of care
upvoted 0 times
...
Gilma
8 months ago
B) The defendant must have acted in breach of the duty of care
upvoted 0 times
...
Crissy
9 months ago
A) The defendant must owe the claimant a legal duty of care
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Alexis
10 months ago
Hmm, I was thinking it might be D, since the defendant doesn't necessarily need to have caused actual damage, just that they breached their duty. But I could be wrong...
upvoted 0 times
Joaquin
8 months ago
No problem, happy to help!
upvoted 0 times
...
Alline
8 months ago
Yeah, that makes sense. Thanks for clarifying!
upvoted 0 times
...
Gladys
8 months ago
I think you're right, it's actually C that is NOT an essential element. The defendant doesn't need to have intended to cause harm, just that they breached their duty.
upvoted 0 times
...
Talia
8 months ago
D) The defendant must have caused some damage, loss or injury to the claimant by breaking the duty of care
upvoted 0 times
...
Dorethea
8 months ago
C) The defendant must have intended to cause physical harm or financial loss to the claimant in breaking the duty of care
upvoted 0 times
...
Aretha
8 months ago
B) The defendant must have acted in breach of the duty of care
upvoted 0 times
...
Ammie
8 months ago
A) The defendant must owe the claimant a legal duty of care
upvoted 0 times
...
Brianne
8 months ago
No problem, happy to help clarify things!
upvoted 0 times
...
Denae
8 months ago
Oh, I see. Thanks for clarifying that. It makes sense now.
upvoted 0 times
...
Altha
9 months ago
I think you're right, it's actually C that is not an essential element. The defendant doesn't need to have intended to cause harm, just that they breached their duty.
upvoted 0 times
...
Yasuko
10 months ago
D) The defendant must have caused some damage, loss or injury to the claimant by breaking the duty of care
upvoted 0 times
...
Laurel
10 months ago
C) The defendant must have intended to cause physical harm or financial loss to the claimant in breaking the duty of care
upvoted 0 times
...
Carmelina
10 months ago
B) The defendant must have acted in breach of the duty of care
upvoted 0 times
...
Yuonne
10 months ago
A) The defendant must owe the claimant a legal duty of care
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Fredric
10 months ago
Well, this is a tricky one. I'm pretty sure the answer is C - the defendant doesn't need to have intended to cause harm, just that they breached their duty of care.
upvoted 0 times
Gayla
10 months ago
Yes, the defendant just needs to have breached their duty of care, they don't have to intend to cause harm.
upvoted 0 times
...
Chun
10 months ago
I think you're right, C is not an essential element of negligence.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Son
10 months ago
But doesn't negligence require the defendant to have caused some damage to the claimant? That's why I think D is the correct answer.
upvoted 0 times
...
Andra
11 months ago
I disagree, I believe the answer is D.
upvoted 0 times
...
Son
11 months ago
I think the answer is C.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel