The window panels of a building belonging to the defendant, which was by the side of a highway, had been broken one Friday in an air-raid. The plaintiff was injured by a glass falling from the window the next Thursday by which time no repairs had been got done by the defendant. In this case, which one of the following is correct?
A. The defendant is liable for negligence
B. The defendant is liable for nuisance
C. The defendant is not liable either of nuisance or of negligence
D. The defendant would get the defence of inevitable accident
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