LSE tort exam includes question about ‘Nigel’ and ‘Donald’ drinking beer and crashing a plane into the River Thames

Exclusive: ‘Boris’ also gets knocked off his bike

London School of Economics (LSE) students sitting a tort exam last week answered a problem question about characters named “Nigel” and “Donald” crashing an aeroplane into the River Thames.

The exam (screenshots below), sat by first year law students on Friday, opens its fictitious scenario with two men named “Nigel” and “Donald” consuming “several pints of imported Belgian beer”. Thirst suitably quenched, the intrepid duo — who appear to be inspired by their famous political namesakes — decide to use Nigel’s light aircraft as part of a “publicity stunt” over Westminster.

Unfortunately, things don’t go to plan, and the banner Nigel was hoping to unfurl becomes entangled in the aeroplane’s propellers causing it to plunge into the River Thames. He is able to swim to safety, while Donald is ignored by police offers and suffers from hypothermia.

It’s probably worth noting at this point that the real Nigel Farage narrowly avoided death under similar circumstances. In 2010, as part of a UK Independence Party campaign, he took to the skies in Northamptonshire in a light aircraft displaying a banner. When the banner’s ropes became entangled around the aeroplane’s tail, the pilot was forced to make an emergency landing in a field. The outspoken MEP suffered a broken sternum, fractured ribs and a punctured lung.

Nigel Farage being helped from the aircraft wreckage back in May 2010

But LSE’s seemingly politically-charged question doesn’t stop there. Witnessing the incident from the back of a taxi, a character called “Chris” opens the vehicle door in order to get a closer look. However he fails to spot a man named “Boris”, who is riding “carefully in the cycle lane”. Could this be a subtle reference to ex-Lord Chancellor Chris Grayling, who knocked a cyclist over with a car door in Parliament Square earlier this year? Boris — who may or may not be inspired by our bumbling blonde Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Boris Johnson — wasn’t wearing a cycle helmet and suffers a minor head injury as a result.

Commenting on the exam’s unusual storyline, one LSE law student, wishing to remain anonymous, told Legal Cheek:

It made me laugh in the exam but was perhaps a little insensitive when considering Nigel Farage was seriously hurt in a plane crash a few years.

LSE declined to comment.

This isn’t the first time the law school’s lecturers have embraced their creative side during exam season. This time last year an LSE IT law exam question went viral on image sharing website Imgur. Drafted by professor Andrew Murray, the question — which racked up over 22,000 views in under 24 hours — featured characters from US comedy Silicon Valley.

For all the latest commercial awareness info, and advance notification of Legal Cheek’s careers events, sign up to the Legal Cheek Hub here.


bar bar black sheep

Its not a commercial awareness. Its to test whether the students understand tort….

Corbyn. Sympathiser.

Donald Trump would not drink several – or indeed, any – pints of beer: he is teetotal. Everything he does and says is done and said stone-cold sober.


Is that tongue in cheek?
“Political namesakes …”

Bath Uni Student

Rather radical left-wing communist USSR admirers


A contract question was about good ol’ Wiggo and his “legal” asthma drugs borrowing money from his mum!


How did they manage to take a photo of this? Sneaky pocket phone


We could always take our question papers with us after the exam … so I assume it was taken after, not a sneaky click during.


You’re allowed to take the paper with you once the exam is over.


I forgot how copyright law worked – thanks, Legal Cheek! As long as you put your watermark it I suppose. Clowns.


Considering Farage was actually injured in a plane crash, I don’t think this is particularly ‘bantah’ or appropriate at all.

I wonder if we get to see an exam paper on Tony who caused hundreds of deaths in the Middle East; Diane who was negligent in counting wages payable to Metropolitan Police; or Jeremy who was arrested while demonstrating.


Nice to see lecturers finally moving away from using questions involving Monica, Chandler and Joey.


This post has been removed because it breached Legal Cheek’s comments policy.


The plane crash is a reference to:

Morris v Murray [1991] 2 QB 6

The Claimant and Defendant had been drinking all day. The Defendant, who had a pilot licence and a light aircraft, suggested that they took the aircraft for a flight. The Claimant agreed and drove them both to the airfield. They started the engine and the Defendant took off but crashed shortly after. The Defendant was killed and the Claimant was seriously injured. An autopsy revealed that the Defendant had consumed the equivalent of 17 Whiskeys. In an action for negligence, the Defendant raised the defence of volenti non fit injuria.


The defence was allowed. The actions of the Claimant in accepting a ride in an aircraft from an obviously heavily intoxicated pilot was so glaringly dangerous that he could be taken to have voluntarily accepted the risk of injury and waived the right to compensation.


Yeah thanks a ton Sherlock Holmes, it’s so obvious to any first year law student, bet you just came out of your exams couple days ago eh?


Out of interest (from someone with a non-legal background), what is the answer to the question?


Comments are closed.