To be sincere i find anything legal related to be very simple. This subject was one of the many law subjects that I have found to be very direct despite numerous complains from my fellow students. All I can say is that it requires concentration and lecture attendance

To do well in Torts required an appreciation for the themes of the course, more so than an ability to apply the strict ratios of cases to fact scenarios. The major essay reflected this, and the hypotheticals can be difficult if you don't grapple with the fundamental principles: duty of care, reasonableness, etc. If you are struggling with the week-to-week content, framing the cases within these broader themes may prove useful (as it did for me).

Some of my favourite content of my degree but was very confusingly taught by Catriona - gave up on the lectures. On the other hand, Rod was an amazing tutor and really brought forth passion for the subject.

This was a really interesting unit and the lectures were great. All the cases were explained thoroughly and I loved the detail in the lectures. I didn't do ANY of the readings and still did really well. Just make sure you keep up to date with your weekly lectures and notes and you should do well. Torts is very structured and easy to follow overall.

The content of this subject was interesting, although it was largely up to students to teach themselves. This was because Catriona's lectures were dry as a bone, and often did not play properly, with random segments of recording popping up throughout it - clearly not edited or listened to before being posted. The whole unit was disorganised and confusing with unclear expectations, and guidance. An example of this is the fact that an "example" hypothetical was put up, but we were not told that it was in fact a poor example until someone asked on the discussion forum. Cartriona also failed to make it clear which readings/lectures went with which week's tutorial. The one saving grace was having Rod as a tutor who was very helpful and clearly passionate about the subject. I would recommend getting on top of the readings very early because the convenor and lectures will be no help to you.

I did not enjoy this subject all too much but that may be attributed to my style of learning. This subject is very much independent and requires you to keep on top of your work, participate actively and seek knowledge beyond the lecture slides. I recommend attending all classes, actively participating and reading all set materials. I had Uche as a tutor, and although terrifying he was great at encouraging self-regulation and self-teaching. Lots of reading (as any law subject is) but at least the hypothetical and final were not too bad. The final is a multiple choice quiz (and was actually really easy).

Torts is a very engaging subject so long as you keep up to speed with the lecture and reading material, otherwise you will get lost and loose interest.

Torts is a subject I feel which encompasses everything that is the joy of studying law. I enjoy learning about the development of common law in this area. Once you come in to terms with the law of torts and the reasoning behind that law, the answering of various scenario type questions starts to become a lot easier and, dare I say it, pleasurable.

Helen is one of those rare lecturers who genuinely wants her students to succeed. She set the information out in a very easy to follow way, and I found her to be an engaging lecturer. At times, the unit was a little disorganised, but a lot of that was due to (generally unavoidable) technical difficulties. My main frustration was with my tutor. He was an unduly harsh marker. Try to get Helen for your tutes!

Had to withdraw from this unit last year due to illness. Helen Haslem taught the subject this year and she is infinitely better than Watson (who taught last year).