There was a plea for damages against the Electricity Board when a cyclist was entrapped and electrocuted by a live wire. The Board tried to oppose the plea on ground that the wire was a diverted line laid by a stranger to siphon energy. Will the Court accept the defence of the Board?
A. The defence would be accepted
B. As the responsibility to supply electricity is statutory the primary liability to compensate is that of the Board
C. The liability to compensate is that of the stranger alone
D. No one is liable to compensate as accident is result of act of God
Answer: Option B
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