Y sold gasoline, a highly inflammable material to X and Z, 6 and 9 years old children. He had asked them why they were purchasing it but they told a lie, that their mother needed it. They actually played with it and X was badly burnt. Answer whether:
A. Y will not be liable to X as he had taken care in asking the children
B. Y is not liable because X had been injured due to inevitable accident
C. Y will be fully liable to X for negligence care is expected of him in selling gasoline, a highly dangerous thing to small children
D. Y is negligent but X is guilty of contributory negligence
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