In his definition of 'Law of Tort', Winfield supports the principle given in the maxim:
A. Ubi remedium ibi jus
B. Ubi jus ibi remedium
C. Respondeat superior
D. Damnum sine injuria
Answer: Option B
Solution(By Examveda Team)
In his definition of the 'Law of Tort', Winfield supports the principle given in the maxim 'Ubi jus ibi remedium', which translates to 'Where there is a right, there is a remedy'. This principle underscores the idea that when a person's legal rights are violated or infringed upon, there should be a corresponding legal remedy available to provide relief or compensation for the harm suffered.Option A: Ubi remedium ibi jus is not the correct answer. The correct maxim is 'Ubi jus ibi remedium'.
Option C: Respondeat superior refers to the legal doctrine of vicarious liability where an employer is held liable for the actions of their employees in certain circumstances.
Option D: Damnum sine injuria is a different legal principle referring to harm suffered without a legal injury or infringement of a right.
Given the options provided, the correct answer is Option B: Ubi jus ibi remedium.
This Question Belongs to Law >> Law Of Torts
Join The Discussion
Comments ( 1 )
The 'tort of intimidation' was propounded in
A. Winterbottom v. Wright
B. Pasley v. Freeman
C. Winsmore v. Greenbank
D. Rookes v. Barnard
The maxim 'scienti non fit injuria' means
A. Where there is no fault, there is no remedy
B. Mere knowledge does not imply consent to take risk
C. Mere giving consent does not imply to take risk
D. Scientific knowledge is not enough to cause injury
A. Scott v. London & St. Katharine Docks Co.
B. Hedley Byrne Co. Ltd. v. Heller & Partners
C. Derry v. Peek
D. Cann v. Willson
A. Section 82 of the Evidence Act
B. Section 102 of the Evidence Act
C. Section 122 of the Evidence Act
D. Section 124 of the Evidence Act
Sir,
I am not very sure whether Option B is correct or not.
Justice Stephen stated that maxim "ubi jus ibi remedium" would be correctly stated if maxim were to be reversed to say that “where there is no legal remedy, there is no legal wrong. Where there is a right, there is a remedy.
I would be grateful if you could kindly give citation/ case law, where Sir Percy Henry Winfield supported this maxim.
Regards
Tilak Singh V