The branch of a tree growing on the defendant's land hung on the highway at a height of about 30 feet above the ground. In fine weather, the branch suddenly broke and fell upon the plaintiff's vehicle which was passing along the highway. For the damage to the vehicle, the plaintiff sues the defendant on the ground of nuisance. Which one of the following conclusions is correct in this suit?
A. The defendant was liable for nuisance
B. The defendant was not liable for nuisance
C. The defendant was liable under the principle of strict liability
D. The plaintiffs suit should be decreed in his favour
Answer: Option C
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