PRINCIPLE: A person is liable for all the injurious consequences of his careless act.
FACT: Ram, a snake charmer, was exhibiting his talents to the group of people. One of the snakes escaped and bit a child who had to be hospitalized for two days for treatment.
A. Ram is liable to compensate the child's family for his careless act
B. Ram is not liable as such things keep happening
C. Ram is not in a position to compensate as he is poor
D. The child should have taken adequate care for protecting herself from the snakebite
Answer: Option A
This Question Belongs to Law >> Law Of Torts
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
Join The Discussion