Self Studies

Topics of Law Test 68

Result Self Studies

Topics of Law Test 68
  • Score

    -

    out of -
  • Rank

    -

    out of -
TIME Taken - -
Self Studies

SHARING IS CARING

If our Website helped you a little, then kindly spread our voice using Social Networks. Spread our word to your readers, friends, teachers, students & all those close ones who deserve to know what you know now.

Self Studies Self Studies
Weekly Quiz Competition
  • Question 1
    1 / -0
    A owned a truck and he had hired B to drive it. On one of its trips, C flagged the truck down and asked to be dropped to a nearby city. B agreed to do so for a small amount of money. The truck met with an accident en route, in which C was badly injured. C sued in for damages.
    Solution
    • The principle of respondeat superior states that a master is vicariously liable for the wrongful acts of his servant which are undertaken within the scope of employment. The term 'scope of employment' has been explained in the case of Carter v Reynolds. The essential requirements of the term as given are: 
    (1) the work is of the kind the employee is entitled to perform. 
    (2) the wrongful act has occurred within the authorized time and space limits. (3) the wrongful act has been actuated atleast partially for the benefit of the master. 
    • In the given instance, all these three factors have been negated because B was not entitled to carry put pick and drop, B drove it to a nearby city outside the space limits of his work and he did it for money and not for the benefit of his master. 
  • Question 2
    1 / -0
    When property is in possession of.a person other than the owner, the owner is in ____________.
  • Question 3
    1 / -0
    The BCCI decided to hold an auction to sell IPL teams. 12 bidders registered for the auction. Unknown to the BCCI, these 12 bidders had entered into a contract that they would not bid more than a certain amount.
    Solution
    Section 23 states "The consideration or object of an agreement is lawful, unless— it is forbidden by law; or is of such a nature that, if permitted, it would defeat the provisions of any law; or is fraudulent; or involves or implies, injury to the person or property of another; or the Court regards it as immoral, or opposed to public policy. In each of these cases, the consideration or object of an agreement is said to be unlawful.
    In this case it is immoral which will lead BCCI to have a loss and hence the contract is void
  • Question 4
    1 / -0
    PRINCIPLE: Ignorance of law is no excuse.
    FACTS: A fails to file his income-tax returns for ten years. The Income-tax department issues to him notice to show cause why proceedings should not be initiated against him for the recovery of the income-tax due from him with interest and penalty.
    ADVISE.
    Solution
    Ignorantia legis neminem excusat or ignorance of law is no excuse states that merely because a person is not aware of any law cannot escape liability under that law for not knowing its contents. It applies to all types of laws, civil,criminal as well as statutory laws. Therefore, even in the absence of any intention to evade taxes the person can escape criminal liability but not the liability to pay the taxes.
    Here in this case, A failed to file his tax returns for ten years and tax paying is a legal liability and hence, ignoring it cannot be a ground of defence. 
  • Question 5
    1 / -0
    Given below are Legal Principles followed by a Factual Situation. Apply the principles followed by a factual Situation. Apply the principle to it and select the most appropriate answer for question among the four choices given.
    LEGAL PRINCIPLE: If a person without any authority prevents a person to proceed in any direction and is kept confined, he commits an offence of criminal confinement. 
    FACTUAL SITUATION: The municipality allowed a special permit to hold a marriage party blocking a part of a public road. The marriage party blocked most of the roads and did not allow X, a passer-by, to cross the road. He brings a charge of criminal confinement against the head of the marriage party and other associates. Can X succeed?
    DECIDE.
    Solution
    • Criminal confinement refers to knowingly and intentionally restraining another person from moving freely without the person's consent and without lawful justification. The important ingredients of criminal confinement are:
    (1) Detention- There must be some form of willful detention i.e. intentionally confining a person to a particular area (with real or imaginary boundaries).
    (2) Unlawful-It must be unlawful i.e. not allowed legally by any authority. Even if the legal authority is used in an unlawful manner it amounts to confinement.
    (3) Consent-The victim must not consent to the restraint.
    (4) Escape-The boundaries should be such that the person should not be able to escape that place by any means like walking away from the place. 
    • In the present instance, the person not only was allowed to leave the place to access another way but the actions were not beyond what was permitted by legal authority. Therefore, no criminal confinement can be established.
  • Question 6
    1 / -0
    PRINCIPLE: In an agreement, a condition subsequent must be complied with, to claim the benefit of that agreement.
    FACTS: A agrees to transfer a farm to B, provided that, if B does not go to England within three years after the date of the agreement, his interest in the farm shall cease. B goes not go to England within the term prescribed.
    Solution
    The condition was for B to go to England within 3 years from the date of commencement of the agreement. But B does not fulfill the condition hence B's interest in the farm does not continue.
  • Question 7
    1 / -0
    Choose the correct answer from the alternatives given.
    Hadley v. Baxendale, (1854) case deals with ___________________.
  • Question 8
    1 / -0
    Given below are Legal Principles followed by a Factual Situation. Apply the principles followed by a factual Situation. Apply the principle to it and select the most appropriate answer for question among the four choices given.
    PRINCIPLE: Attempt is not an offence until it is an attempt to commit an offence punishable with imprisonment.
    FACTS: Z makes an attempt to steal some jewels by breaking open a box, and finds after so opening the box, that there is no jewels in it.
    Solution
    There are 4 stages of a crime- Intention-- Preparation-- Attempt and Commission.
    The first 2 stages are not punishable as only mens reus is involved in the former stages, whereas in the latter two stages actus reus comes into play, Therefore when the act is in the latter two stages then it is punishable. 
    The legal principle restates the above principle. An attempt is not an offence until it is an attempt to commit an offence punishable with imprisonment.
    The principle doesn't state whether the offence is punishable with imprisonment or not.
    Option A is not correct because the legal principle doesn't make an act towards the commission of a crime as an offence. It makes attempt to commit a crime punishable with imprisonment as an offence. 
    Between option B and C, Option C is the better option as it clearly states the reasoning.  
  • Question 9
    1 / -0
    Given below are Legal Principles followed by a Factual Situation. Apply the principles followed by a factual Situation. Apply the principle to it and select the most appropriate answer for question among the four choices given.

    LEGAL PRINCIPLE: A master will be liable for the wrongful acts of his servants in course of employment.

    FACTUAL SITUATION: Mrs. Nitu, an old woman had an account in a bank. Mr. Robert, her tenant used to collect Rs. 100 from Mrs. Nitu and deposited it every week in the account of Mrs. Nitu. Mr. Robert got a commission from the bank for depositing that amount every week. After few months of transaction, it was found that Mr. Robert had not deposited the amount for five months in the account and that he had run away with that amount. Mrs. Nitu filed a suit against the bank.

    Question-Is the bank liable?
    Solution
    Vicarious liability can be defined as a legal doctrine that assigns liability for an injury to a person who did not cause the injury who has a particular relationship to the person who did act negligently. 
    An act is deemed to be done in the course of employment if it is either
    (a) wrongful act authorised by master.
    (b) wrongful & unauthorised mode of doing some act authorised by master that is unauthorised in the way act is done by the servant.

    In the above case, Bank will be liable as the wrongful act was committed by Mr. Robert in the course of employment.
  • Question 10
    1 / -0
    The phrase per incuriam refers to ___________________
Self Studies
User
Question Analysis
  • Correct -

  • Wrong -

  • Skipped -

My Perfomance
  • Score

    -

    out of -
  • Rank

    -

    out of -
Re-Attempt Weekly Quiz Competition
Self Studies Get latest Exam Updates
& Study Material Alerts!
No, Thanks
Self Studies
Click on Allow to receive notifications
Allow Notification
Self Studies
Self Studies Self Studies
To enable notifications follow this 2 steps:
  • First Click on Secure Icon Self Studies
  • Second click on the toggle icon
Allow Notification
Get latest Exam Updates & FREE Study Material Alerts!
Self Studies ×
Open Now