Which of the following is the correct explanation of the principle of absolute liability?
A. Where an enterprise is engaged in inherently dangerous activity, the persons engaged in the activity are liable irrespective of the fact whether they took reasonable care in carrying out such activity or not
B. Where an enterprise is engaged in a dangerous activity, the persons engaged in the activity are not liable if they took reasonable care in carrying out such activity
C. Where an enterprise is engaged in inherently dangerous activity, the persons engaged in the activity are liable only if they were at fault
D. There is no absolute liability in any case
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