At the bank

It's Saturday morning and Joan's gone to the bank:Joan: I'd like to open a bank account, please.
Cashier: Certainly. Do you have some form of identification?
Joan: Yes, I bought my passport. Is that OK.
Cashier: Yes. We also need proof of your current address. Do you have a utility bill or your
driver's licence with you?
Joan: I've got my driver's licence.
Cashier What kind of account did you want?
Joan: Well I want a deposit account and a savings account.
Cashier: That's fine, we do both. Do you have any proof of income?
Joan: Yes, I bought my pay slips for the last three months.
Cashier: Good. You could also apply for a credit card at the same time, if you like.
Joan: Yes, that would be great.
Cashier: OK. If you would just like to fill out these forms...
1. Joan is at the building society.
1. ? True
2. ? False
3. ? Doesn't say
2. The cashier asks for her identification card.
1. ? True
2. ? False
3. ? Doesn't say
3. Joan uses her passport as her ID.
1. ? True
2. ? False
3. ? Doesn't say
4. Joan can drive.
1.

? True

2. ? False
3. ? Doesn't say
5. Joan wants to open more than one account.
1. ? True
2. ? False
3. ? Doesn't say
6. Joan asks for a deposit account and a credit card.
1. ? True
2. ? False
3. ? Doesn't say
7. Joan works in a bank.
1. ? True
2. ? False
3. ? Doesn't say
8. Joan has been working for three months.
1. ? True
2. ? False
3. ? Doesn't say
9. Joan can't have a credit card.
1. ? True
2. ? False
3. ? Doesn't say
10. The cashier fills in the forms for Joan.
1.
2.
3.

? True
? False
? Doesn't say

Passage
Under law, negligence is usually defined in the context of jury instructions wherein a judge
instructs the jury that a party is to be considered negligent if they failed to exercise the standard
of care that a reasonable person would have exercised under the same circumstances. In most
jurisdictions, it is necessary to show first that a person had a duty to exercise care in a given
situation, and that they breached that duty.
In brief: Negligence, a tort, is a civil wrong consisting of five criteria: Duty or reasonable
standard of care (as decided by judge as a matter of law), Breach (or "negligence" in laymen's
terms, decided as a matter of fact), Injury (the fact that the plaintiff suffered an injury, and is
determined at a matter of fact), Cause in Fact or conduct of defendant that causes plaintiff's
injury(s)(decided as a matter of fact), Legal Cause (now perceived as the foreseeability of the

type of injury caused but not the specific injury or extent of injury, determined as a matter of
fact). Matters of law are decided by a judge, matters of fact are decided by a jury.
In order to prove negligence, it is not necessary to prove harm, but in order for a cause of action
to rest in tort, harm must be proven. Hence, it would be meaningless to sue someone for
negligence if no harm resulted. Conversely, it is not enough that a harm was done. In order for
the harm to be compensable in a negligence lawsuit, the defendant must be shown to have been
negligent, and it must be demonstrated that his negligence was the proximate cause of the harm
sustained by the plaintiff.
1) Matters of fact and matters of law are decided by a judge and jury respectively.

true

false`

can't say

Answer = B

2) The defendant must be shown to have been negligent before compensation can be awarded.

true

false`

can't say

Answer = A

3) Legal cause is one of the criteria which is determined by a judge.

true

false`

can't say

Answer = B

4) In some cases negligence can be proven but harm cannot be proven.

true

false`

can't say

Answer = C

5) Proximate cause is an important concept in cases of negligence.

true

false`

can't say

Answer = A