Question 1

Answer: B

Sir Edward is very clear (as far as his 17th Century English can be) that a civil claim will arise out of damage to any property. The key is simply the idea that the body on its own is not property whereas a gravestone, flowers and clothes are. Option B is the only option where no property has been taken.

 

Question 2

Answer: C

If you went for A then you were almost there! By nature of B being incorrect that ruled out D and E leaving A and C. The difference is that A just takes it too far, there is not really a suggestion that the corpse is no longer a corpse, just that it had been 'worked on'. This Lockean idea of 'property' being 'created' from skill and labour being mixed with something tangible is what the judge was going for in that case.

 

Question 3

Answer: E

This one is easy to get mixed up with. Create a timeline in your head, you know the judgment was written in 2009 and in the first paragraph they are talking about age old principle. From there you must place 1961 between the judgment (2009) and the old (common law) principles (centuries old). That way you should be able to see 'reform' as legalisation. If you did go for B then you were still on the right track, the others were less convincing.

 

Question 4

Answer: E

This is as thought-provoking as it is controversial. Plenty of you will have gone for B (maybe also C) and will continue to be convinced that you are correct. The short answer is, maybe you are! The long answer is, ‘but E is most convincing’. Though the introduction says that "we cannot sell ourselves, or be sold, to others" this seems, in context, a stronger reference to slavery and there is no compelling reason for believing this extends to free-market prostitution (as opposed to 'sex slavery'). Indeed, is selling your body for prostitution objectively any/much different to "working" on a corpse or a sportsperson selling themselves to a sports team? If you find this unconvincing then it shows your mind is working the way the LNAT wants you to think! Keep going & keep disagreeing if you need to!