Unit V · Topic 3General defenses – Previous Year Questions

Question: (DECEMBER 2009)

If a person enters voluntarily into a sports event and receives grave injury, he has:

Options:

1. (a)A claim in torts for medical expenses though not for a loss of income
2. (b)A claim in torts for loss of earning capacity
3. (c)No claim in torts because the injury was not intentionally caused
4. (d)No claim in torts because of the principle volenti non fit injuria✓

Question: (JUNE 2010)

Limitations of the scope of the doctrine volenti non fit injuria are:

Options:

1. (a)Rescue cases
2. (b)Statutory authority
3. (c)Both (a) and (b)✓
4. (d)None of the above

Question:

Assertion (A): For an “Act of God” to be an exception, there must be natural forces so unexpected that no human foresight or skill could reasonably anticipate it.

Reason (R): It is not an absolute exception and can be overlooked.

Options:

1. (a)(A) is correct, but (R) is wrong
2. (b)(R) is correct, but (A) is wrong
3. (c)Both (A) and (R) are correct✓
4. (d)Both (A) and (R) are wrong

Question: (JUNE 2011)

Match the following:

A. Act of God → ?

B. Remoteness of damage → ?

C. Act of State → ?

D. Negligence → ?

Secretary of State for India v. Hari Bhai

Nichols v. Marsland

Donoghue v. Stevenson

Smith v. London & South Western Rly. Co.

Codes:

1. (a)A–3, B–1, C–2, D–4
2. (b)A–2, B–4, C–1, D–3✓
3. (c)A–1, B–2, C–3, D–4
4. (d)A–4, B–3, C–2, D–1

Match List-I with List-II and select the correct answer using the codes given below the lists:

List-I | List-II

A. Damnum sine injuria | 2. Gloucester Grammar School case

B. Absolute liability | 4. Rylands v. Fletcher

C. Injuria sine damnum | 1. Ashby v. White

D. Inevitable accident | 3. Stanley v. Powell

Codes:

1. (a)A–2, B–4, C–1, D–3✓
2. (b)A–1, B–3, C–4, D–2
3. (c)A–3, B–1, C–2, D–4
4. (d)A–4, B–2, C–3, D–1

While X with a package was trying to board a running train, the railway guard tried to help him and pushed him inside a compartment but the package fell and rolled down on the railway track causing an explosion (as package contained fireworks), and a splinter hit Y who was some ten feet away, injuring him. Y sued the railway company for negligence of the railway guard.

1. (a)Railway company is liable
2. (b)Railway company is not liable as it owed no duty to Y
3. (c)Injury to Y is too remote, hence no liability
4. (d)Railway company owed a duty to the general public that its employees will not act negligently✓

Following are good defences to an action in torts:

Volenti non fit injuria

Scienti non fit injuria

Vis major

1. (a)1, 2
2. (b)2, 3
3. (c)1, 3✓
4. (d)Only 3

Which one of following defences is not available in Law of Tort?

1. (a)Volenti non fit injuria
2. (b)Act of God
3. (c)Contributory negligence✓
4. (d)Res ipsa loquitur

The plaintiff was watching a cricket match at a stadium organized by the Cricket Club of India. He was seriously injured by a mighty hit from the batsman. In this case, who is liable to pay the damages to the plaintiff?

1. (a)The batsman
2. (b)The Cricket Club of India
3. (c)Both (a) and (b) above
4. (d)None of the above✓

Due to the negligence of the owners of a well, it was filled with poisonous gases and two of the employees were trapped inside the well. B, an expert in disaster management, was called to rescue them. Despite being warned of the risk, B entered the well with the help of a rope to save the employees. He was overcome by the gases and later died in hospital. B’s wife sued the owners of the well for compensation.

1. (a)Owners are not liable because maxim volenti non fit injuria applies
2. (b)Owners are not liable because B was an expert and master of his trade
3. (c)Owners are liable because the act of B was the natural and probable consequence of the owners’ negligent act✓
4. (d)Owners are liable because B died while being engaged by them

P and Q, unknown to R, sought and got a lift in R's car, but on account of some mechanical defect in the car, of which R was not aware, one of the front wheels of the car got detached and flew away, and the car toppled. P and Q got serious injuries and later on, P died of his injuries. Q and P's next kin sued R for damages for negligent driving. What defence does R have?

1. (a)Volenti non fit injuria
2. (b)No responsibility towards P and Q who got a free lift
3. (c)Inevitable accident✓
4. (d)No defence

Which one of the following is not a valid defence in tort?

1. (a)Vis major
2. (b)Volenti non fit injuria
3. (c)Inevitable accident
4. (d)Sienti non fit injuria✓

Match the List-I with List-II and give the correct answer using the codes below:

List-I (Name of Defence) | List-II (Case Law)

A. Act of State | 1. Buron v. Denman

B. Consent | 2. Hail v. Brookland Auto Racing Club

C. Act of God | 3. Metropolitan Asylum Board v. Hills

D. Statutory Authority | 4. Nicholas v. Marsland

Codes:

1. (a)3 2 1 4
2. (b)1 2 4 3✓
3. (c)3 1 2 4
4. (d)4 1 3 2

Which one of the following is not an exception to the rule of volenti non fit injuria?

1. (a)Surgeon amputates a limb of a patient to save his life
2. (b)Injury is caused while play-fighting with naked swords at a religious function✓
3. (c)Injury is caused while doing lawful acts under a contract
4. (d)Injury is caused to a player in a football match

Which of the following statement(s) is/are incorrect?

Mistake of fact or of law is generally a defence to tort

Law permits reasonable force to protect person or property

Act of God is a defence if there is working of natural forces with ordinary occurrence

Inevitable accident is not a defence if defendant proves no intention to injure and could not avoid with reasonable care

Codes:

1. (a)(1) and (2) only
2. (b)(1), (2) and (3) only
3. (c)(1), (2), (3) and (4) all
4. (d)(1), (3) and (4) only✓

Question: (DECEMBER 2009)

If A gives lift in his car to B up to a certain place and on the way due to negligence of A an accident is caused. A has:

Options:

1. (a)No responsibility towards B
2. (b)No legal duty to take care of B's safety
3. (c)A legal duty to take care of B also and is liable for compensation✓
4. (d)All of the above

P voluntarily accepted a lift from D, who was drunk and driving the car. D was affected by the drink and this was known to P. D caused an accident in which P suffered injury. Here:

1. (a)D can escape the liability because P was aware of risk.
2. (b)D is liable because P did not agree to suffer the harm.
3. (c)D is not liable because he gave free lift to P.
4. (d)D is liable because the degree of intoxication was not such that it can be assumed there was voluntary assumption of risk.✓

An accident is 'one of ordinary course of things, something so unusual as not to be looked for by a person of ordinary prudence', is said to be

1. (a)Negligence
2. (b)Inevitable Accident✓
3. (c)Act of God
4. (d)dammum sine injuria

Which of the following is not a valid defence in tort?

1. (a)Private Defence
2. (b)Volenti non fit injuria
3. (c)Vis major
4. (d)Ex dolo malo non Oritur actio✓

Following are good defences to an action in tort

1. Act of God

2. volenti non fit injuria

3. private defence

4. trustee do son tort

Choose the correct option

1. (a)1, 2 and 4 only
2. (b)2, 3 and 4 only
3. (c)4, 1 and 3 only
4. (d)1, 2 and 3 only✓

Match List – I with List -II

I -II

List-I/I List-II

A. Mersey Dock's v. Proctor I. Statutory Authority

B. Metropolitan Asylum District v. Hill - II. Vicarious liability

C. Nichols v. Marsland III. Inevitable accident

D. Holmes v. Mather IV. Act of God

Choose the correct answer from the options given below

1. (a)A - II, B – I, C - IV, D - III✓
2. (b)A - III, B - II, C- I, D - IV
3. (c)A - I, B - II, C- III, D - IV
4. (d)A - IV, B - II, C - III, D - I

In case of "tort of trespass", which of the following defence shall not apply?

1. (a)Statutory authority
2. (b)Contributory negligence✓
3. (c)Private defence
4. (d)Mesne profits

Which of the following is not a general defence under the law of torts?

A. Mistake

B. Remoteness

C. Necessity

D. Consent

Choose the correct answer from the options given below: 1. 2. 3 4. B Only

1. (a)A and B Only
2. (b)C Only
3. (c)C and D Only
4. (d)B Only✓