Deal of The Day! 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

Which ONE of the following is NOT an essential element of the tort of negligence?
A) The defendant must owe the claimant a legal duty of care and B) The defendant must have acted in breach of the duty of care and C) The defendant must have intended to cause physical harm or financial loss to the claimant in breaking the duty of care
D) The defendant must have caused some damage, loss or injury to the claimant by breaking the duty of care

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
8 months ago
Duty of care and breach are must-haves, for sure.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lettie
8 months ago
I thought intention was key in negligence cases.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ardella
8 months ago
Wait, so intention isn’t needed? That’s surprising!
upvoted 0 times
...
Barrie
9 months ago
Totally agree, C is the odd one out!
upvoted 0 times
...
Selma
9 months ago
C is definitely not essential.
upvoted 0 times
...
Whitney
9 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
9 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
9 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
9 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
10 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
10 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
10 months ago
The workflows are probably in the FND data, since that's where the application configuration information is stored.
upvoted 0 times
...
Harrison
10 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
1 year 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
1 year 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
1 year 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
1 year ago
B) The defendant must have acted in breach of the duty of care
upvoted 0 times
...
Jame
1 year ago
A) The defendant must owe the claimant a legal duty of care
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Gayla
1 year 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
1 year ago
Exactly, it's more about the actions and consequences rather than the intent.
upvoted 0 times
...
Shay
1 year ago
Yeah, that's right. Negligence is about failing to meet the standard of care, not necessarily intending harm.
upvoted 0 times
...
Boris
1 year ago
C) is correct. It's not necessary for the defendant to have intended to cause harm.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lavina
1 year 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
1 year 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
1 year ago
B) The defendant must have acted in breach of the duty of care
upvoted 0 times
...
Crissy
1 year ago
A) The defendant must owe the claimant a legal duty of care
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Alexis
1 year 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
1 year ago
No problem, happy to help!
upvoted 0 times
...
Alline
1 year ago
Yeah, that makes sense. Thanks for clarifying!
upvoted 0 times
...
Gladys
1 year 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
1 year 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
1 year 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
1 year ago
B) The defendant must have acted in breach of the duty of care
upvoted 0 times
...
Ammie
1 year ago
A) The defendant must owe the claimant a legal duty of care
upvoted 0 times
...
Brianne
1 year ago
No problem, happy to help clarify things!
upvoted 0 times
...
Denae
1 year ago
Oh, I see. Thanks for clarifying that. It makes sense now.
upvoted 0 times
...
Altha
1 year 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
1 year 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
1 year 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
1 year ago
B) The defendant must have acted in breach of the duty of care
upvoted 0 times
...
Yuonne
1 year ago
A) The defendant must owe the claimant a legal duty of care
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Fredric
1 year 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
1 year 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
1 year ago
I think you're right, C is not an essential element of negligence.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Son
1 year 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
1 year ago
I disagree, I believe the answer is D.
upvoted 0 times
...
Son
1 year ago
I think the answer is C.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel