Several children of a school had gone on sightseeing under charge of two teachers of the school. Before lunch, some of the children decided to take bath in the near river on the bank of which they had camped. While swimming, two of the children were drowned. It was found that the teachers incharge were taking lunch at that time. In a suit for compensation:
A. The headmaster of the school would be liable as he had permitted for the sightseeing
B. The headmaster would be vicariously liable for the negligence of the teachers
C. The school administration would be vicariously liable for breach of duty to take care by the teachers
D. No one would be liable because the accident was due to the recklessness on the part of the children themselves
Answer: Option C
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