CLAT UG question bank

Legal Reasoning MCQs for CLAT UG, Page 3

CLAT UG Legal Reasoning questions 48-71 of 310, with answer keys and explanations covering self-contained legal principles, factual application, changes in outcome, rights, duties, liability, and remedies.

310 questions61 topics48-71 on this page

Start adaptive practice Browse CLAT UG

Coverage

Topics in this subject

Practice passage-based CLAT UG questions with answers for English, current affairs, legal reasoning, logical reasoning, and quantitative techniques.

Agency and Authority10
Agreements in Restraint of Trade5
Anticipatory Breach of Contract5
Appropriation of Payments5
Assault and Battery5
Assignment of Contractual Rights5
Authority of an Agent and Ratification5
Bailment and Duty of Care5
Breach of Condition and Warranty5
Caveat Emptor and Quality of Goods5
Coercion in Contracts5
Communication and Revocation of Proposals5
Contingent Contracts5
Contract of Guarantee and Surety5
Contract of Indemnity5
Contractual Misrepresentation5
Contributory Negligence and Apportionment5
Defamation and Defences5
Defamation and Responsible Publication5
Doctrine of Election in Property Transfers5
Doctrine of Part Performance5
False Imprisonment5
Fraud and Contractual Consent5
Frustration of Contract5
Fundamental Rights and Proportionality5
Guarantee Obtained by Misrepresentation5
Informed Consent to Medical Treatment5
Intervening Acts and Causation5
Joint Promisors and Contribution5
Malicious Prosecution5
Mistake and Restitution5
Necessaries Supplied to an Incapable Person5
Negligence and Standard of Care5
Non-Gratuitous Acts and Restitution5
Novation and Alteration of Contract5
Occupier Liability to Visitors5
Offer, Acceptance, and Revocation5
Pledge and Rights of the Pawnee5
Preparation and Criminal Attempt5
Private Defence of the Person5
Private Necessity and Property Damage5
Privity and Third-Party Rights5
Promissory Estoppel and Public Interest5
Public Nuisance and Special Damage5
Remission and Waiver of Contractual Performance5
Remoteness of Contractual Damages5
Res Ipsa Loquitur5
Right of Private Defence5
Rights and Duties of a Finder of Goods5
Rights of an Unpaid Seller5
Sale and Agreement to Sell5
Sale by a Non-Owner5
Sale by Sample and Description5
Stipulated Damages and Reasonable Compensation5
Strict Liability and Escape5
Time as the Essence of Contract5
Trespass to Goods and Conversion5
Trespass to Land and Necessity5
Undue Influence in Contracts5
Unlawful Object and Severability5
Vicarious Liability5

Passage or principleOriginal legal principle and fact scenarios

A person commits defamation by publishing to another person a false statement of fact that harms an individual's reputation. Communicating the statement only to the person concerned is not publication to another. Repeating a rumour can amount to publication even when the speaker identifies it as a rumour. Truth is a complete defence. Honest opinion is a defence when the statement is recognisable as opinion, is based on substantially true facts disclosed or generally known, and is honestly held. Merely labelling a factual allegation as an opinion does not make it one. A good-faith statement made where the speaker has a duty to communicate and the recipient has a corresponding interest in receiving it is protected by qualified privilege. The protection is lost if the speaker acts with malice, such as knowing falsity or a dominant improper motive. Apply only these principles.

Question 48HardDefamation and Defences

A reviewer discloses accurate details of a meal and writes, "In my view, it was badly prepared." The view is honestly held. Is the defence available?

A
No, reviews can never contain opinions.
B
No, because criticism is automatically false.
C
Yes, it is recognisable as honest opinion based on disclosed true facts.
D
Yes, even if the stated facts were invented maliciously.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: C. Yes, it is recognisable as honest opinion based on disclosed true facts.

C satisfies each requirement for honest opinion.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 5, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Question 49MediumDefamation and Defences

T repeats to a group a false and harmful rumour about R, adding that it is "only a rumour." What follows?

A
There is no publication because T used a warning.
B
Repeating the rumour may itself amount to publication.
C
T is protected because groups cannot receive statements.
D
The rumour automatically becomes true.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: B. Repeating the rumour may itself amount to publication.

B applies the express rule that repetition can amount to publication.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 5, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Question 50HardDefamation and Defences

A manager knowingly sends a false accusation about an employee to an internal disciplinary officer. Can the manager rely on qualified privilege?

A
Yes, workplace messages are always protected.
B
Yes, knowing falsity proves good faith.
C
No, because disciplinary officers have no interest in misconduct.
D
No, malice through knowing falsity defeats the protection.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: D. No, malice through knowing falsity defeats the protection.

D is correct because qualified privilege is lost when the speaker knows the statement is false.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 5, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Passage or principleOriginal legal principle and fact scenarios

A misrepresentation is a false statement of existing fact made by one contracting party that materially induces the other party to enter the contract. A mere sales exaggeration or honestly held opinion is generally not a statement of fact. However, an opinion may imply facts when the speaker has special knowledge that makes the opinion reasonably understood as based on those facts. Silence alone is ordinarily not misrepresentation. It may become misleading when a party tells a half-truth or when an earlier statement becomes false before the contract and is not corrected. The misled party may rescind the contract. Rescission may be lost if, after discovering the truth, that party clearly affirms the contract. Apply only these principles.

Question 51MediumContractual Misrepresentation

S falsely tells B that a car has never been in an accident. B relies on this and buys it. What is the best conclusion?

A
There is no remedy because cars are movable.
B
The false factual statement may amount to misrepresentation.
C
It is only an opinion in every circumstance.
D
The contract is valid because B relied on the statement.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: B. The false factual statement may amount to misrepresentation.

B is correct because the accident history is an existing fact that induced the contract.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 6, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Question 52HardContractual Misrepresentation

An art expert selling a painting states, "In my opinion, this is an original," despite records in her possession proving it is a copy. The buyer relies. What follows?

A
The word opinion prevents liability automatically.
B
Records can never affect an opinion.
C
The statement may imply false facts because the expert had special knowledge.
D
No contract can involve art.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: C. The statement may imply false facts because the expert had special knowledge.

C applies the rule concerning opinions backed by special knowledge.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 6, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Question 53MediumContractual Misrepresentation

S says nothing about a fact, makes no partial statement, and has no earlier statement to correct. Under the passage, is silence alone ordinarily misrepresentation?

A
No, silence alone is ordinarily insufficient.
B
Yes, every undisclosed fact is misrepresentation.
C
Yes, but only for written contracts.
D
No, because misrepresentation never affects consent.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: A. No, silence alone is ordinarily insufficient.

A states the ordinary rule in the passage.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 6, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Question 54HardContractual Misrepresentation

S truthfully states in January that a shop is licensed. The licence is cancelled before the March sale, but S does not correct the statement. B relies on it. What is the best conclusion?

A
There is no issue because the statement was once true.
B
Silence can never matter.
C
B must know every licensing fact independently.
D
Failure to correct the now-false statement may be misrepresentation.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: D. Failure to correct the now-false statement may be misrepresentation.

D applies the duty to correct a statement that becomes false before contracting.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 6, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Question 55MediumContractual Misrepresentation

B discovers the misrepresentation but expressly confirms that the contract will continue. Can B later seek rescission under the passage?

A
Yes, affirmation creates a new misrepresentation.
B
Rescission may be lost because B affirmed after discovering the truth.
C
Yes, rescission can never be lost.
D
No, because the original statement becomes true.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: B. Rescission may be lost because B affirmed after discovering the truth.

B follows the rule on affirmation after discovery.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 6, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Passage or principleOriginal legal principle and fact scenarios

Trespass to land occurs when a person intentionally enters or directly causes an object to enter land possessed by another without permission or legal justification. The person need not intend to violate the law. A reasonable mistake about ownership is not by itself a defence. Entry under a valid licence is permitted within the licence's scope. If the licence is revoked, the visitor must leave within a reasonable time. Remaining after that time may become trespass. Necessity may justify entry reasonably required to prevent an imminent and greater harm, but only while the emergency continues and only to the extent reasonably necessary. Convenience or a shorter route is not necessity. Apply only these principles.

Question 56MediumTrespass to Land and Necessity

T intentionally walks onto P's land, honestly but mistakenly believing it belongs to T. Is the mistake by itself a defence?

A
Yes, honest mistake always transfers ownership.
B
Yes, because entry was intentional.
C
No, but only if damage occurred.
D
No, a mistake about ownership is not by itself a defence.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: D. No, a mistake about ownership is not by itself a defence.

D directly applies the stated rule.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 6, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Question 57EasyTrespass to Land and Necessity

P permits D to enter a garden between 9 a.m. and 10 a.m. D enters at 9:30 a.m. for the permitted purpose. Is D a trespasser?

A
No, D entered within the scope of a valid licence.
B
Yes, every entry onto another's land is trespass.
C
Yes, because licences concern only buildings.
D
No, because D owns the garden.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: A. No, D entered within the scope of a valid licence.

A is correct because the entry falls within the permission granted.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 6, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Question 58HardTrespass to Land and Necessity

P revokes V's permission to remain and gives V a reasonable opportunity to leave. V refuses and stays for several hours. What follows?

A
V can remain forever because initial entry was permitted.
B
Revocation has no legal effect.
C
V may become a trespasser by remaining after a reasonable time.
D
P automatically loses possession.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: C. V may become a trespasser by remaining after a reasonable time.

C applies the rule on remaining after revocation.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 6, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Question 59MediumTrespass to Land and Necessity

To escape an immediate wildfire, H crosses P's field by the only safe route and leaves when the danger passes. Is the entry justified?

A
No, necessity never applies to land.
B
Yes, the limited entry was reasonably required to prevent greater imminent harm.
C
No, because H entered intentionally.
D
Yes, so H may occupy the field permanently.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: B. Yes, the limited entry was reasonably required to prevent greater imminent harm.

B is correct because the entry was necessary, limited, and ended with the emergency.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 6, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Question 60MediumTrespass to Land and Necessity

R crosses a private garden only to shorten a routine journey by five minutes. Can R rely on necessity?

A
Yes, every shorter route is necessary.
B
Yes, if R is in a hurry.
C
No, but only if flowers are damaged.
D
No, convenience does not amount to necessity.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: D. No, convenience does not amount to necessity.

D follows the express distinction between emergency and convenience.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 6, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Passage or principleOriginal legal principle and fact scenarios

An employer is vicariously liable for a tort committed by an employee in the course of employment. This includes an authorised act performed negligently and an unauthorised manner of performing an authorised task. An employer is generally not liable when the employee abandons work for a purely personal venture unconnected with employment. A prohibition does not always remove liability. If the employee violates instructions while still carrying out the employer's business, the act may remain within the course of employment. A person hiring an independent contractor is generally not vicariously liable for that contractor's tort merely because the work was hired. Apply only these principles.

Question 61MediumVicarious Liability

A delivery driver negligently injures P while making an assigned delivery. Is the employer vicariously liable?

A
No, negligence always ends employment.
B
Yes, the tort occurred while performing an authorised task.
C
No, only the driver can ever be liable.
D
Yes, but only if the parcel was empty.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: B. Yes, the tort occurred while performing an authorised task.

B is correct because the driver was carrying out the assigned delivery.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 7, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Question 62HardVicarious Liability

A driver is told not to exceed the speed limit but speeds to complete an assigned delivery and causes an accident. What is the best conclusion?

A
The instruction automatically removes all liability.
B
Driving can never be within employment.
C
The employer may be liable because the driver was still performing the assigned task in an unauthorised manner.
D
The employer owns the injured person's vehicle.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: C. The employer may be liable because the driver was still performing the assigned task in an unauthorised manner.

C applies the rule concerning a prohibited manner of performing authorised work.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 7, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Question 63MediumVicarious Liability

During work, E takes the employer's van on a long trip solely to visit a friend and causes an accident. Is the employer liable under the passage?

A
No, E had abandoned work for a purely personal venture.
B
Yes, every act during working hours is covered.
C
Yes, because friendship is part of employment.
D
No, because vans cannot cause torts.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: A. No, E had abandoned work for a purely personal venture.

A is correct because the journey was wholly personal and unconnected with work.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 7, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Question 64MediumVicarious Liability

P hires an independent contractor to paint an office. The contractor negligently damages a neighbour's car. Is P liable merely because P hired the work?

A
Yes, every hirer is an employer.
B
Yes, painting creates strict liability.
C
No, but only if the office is closed.
D
No, a hirer is generally not vicariously liable merely for hiring an independent contractor.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: D. No, a hirer is generally not vicariously liable merely for hiring an independent contractor.

D directly applies the stated rule.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 7, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Question 65HardVicarious Liability

Which fact is most important in deciding vicarious liability under the passage?

A
Whether the employee owns a home
B
Whether the tort was sufficiently connected with carrying out the employer's business
C
Whether the victim knows the employer
D
Whether the employee apologises

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: B. Whether the tort was sufficiently connected with carrying out the employer's business

B captures the controlling connection required by the principles.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 7, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Passage or principleOriginal legal principle and fact scenarios

Public nuisance is an unreasonable interference with a right common to the public, such as safe use of a public road or access to a public waterway. The interference may affect many people without causing identical loss to each. Public authorities may seek remedies for the community. A private individual may sue only by proving special damage that is direct, substantial, and different in kind from the inconvenience suffered by the public generally. Negligence is not essential if the interference itself is unreasonable. A temporary obstruction may still be a nuisance when sufficiently serious, while a minor and brief inconvenience ordinarily is not. Apply only these principles.

Question 66MediumPublic Nuisance and Special Damage

A company unreasonably blocks the only public road for several days. What interest is affected?

A
Only ownership of private homes
B
Only contractual rights
C
No legally relevant interest
D
The public right to use the road safely

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: D. The public right to use the road safely

D is correct because access to a public road is a right common to the public.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 7, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Question 67HardPublic Nuisance and Special Damage

The blockage delays all residents, but it also prevents R's ambulance from reaching a hospital and causes R a serious distinct injury. May R sue privately?

A
Yes, R suffered direct and substantial damage different in kind from general delay.
B
No, individuals can never sue for public nuisance.
C
No, because roads are public.
D
Yes, without proving any personal loss.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: A. Yes, R suffered direct and substantial damage different in kind from general delay.

A applies the special-damage requirement.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 7, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Question 68MediumPublic Nuisance and Special Damage

P suffers only the same ten-minute delay experienced by every road user. Can P privately sue under the passage?

A
Yes, every delay is special damage.
B
Yes, if P dislikes waiting.
C
No, P has not shown damage different in kind from that of the public.
D
No, because public nuisance has no remedies.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: C. No, P has not shown damage different in kind from that of the public.

C is correct because P's inconvenience is merely general.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 7, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Question 69MediumPublic Nuisance and Special Damage

D intentionally creates a serious and unreasonable obstruction but uses careful equipment. Is lack of negligence conclusive?

A
Yes, public nuisance always requires carelessness.
B
No, unreasonable interference may suffice without negligence.
C
Yes, careful equipment legalises every obstruction.
D
No, but only if D intended injury.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: B. No, unreasonable interference may suffice without negligence.

B follows the express statement that negligence is not essential.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 7, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Question 70HardPublic Nuisance and Special Damage

Can a temporary obstruction amount to public nuisance?

A
Never, duration is the only factor.
B
Only if it lasts one year.
C
Only when property is destroyed.
D
Yes, if the temporary interference is sufficiently serious.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: D. Yes, if the temporary interference is sufficiently serious.

D states the rule given in the final paragraph.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 7, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Passage or principleOriginal legal principle and fact scenarios

When one person makes a clear promise intended to affect legal relations, and another reasonably relies on it to alter their position, the promisor may be prevented from acting inconsistently if doing so would be inequitable. The promise need not form a complete contract. The doctrine may apply to a public authority, but it cannot compel an act prohibited by statute. A public authority may also resist enforcement where it proves that an overriding public interest requires departure from the promise. A bare assertion of convenience is insufficient. Reliance must be connected to the promise. Conduct undertaken before the promise, or for an independent reason, does not satisfy the rule. Apply only these principles.

Question 71MediumPromissory Estoppel and Public Interest

A university clearly promises a fee waiver to R, expecting R to enrol. R declines another offer and enrols. The university withdraws the waiver without justification. What is the best conclusion?

A
The university may be prevented from withdrawing because R reasonably relied on a clear promise.
B
The promise is irrelevant because no reliance occurred.
C
Estoppel applies only after a court judgment.
D
The university may withdraw every promise for convenience.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: A. The university may be prevented from withdrawing because R reasonably relied on a clear promise.

A satisfies clear promise, intended reliance, alteration of position, and inequity.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 8, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Topics in this subject

A reviewer discloses accurate details of a meal and writes, "In my view, it was badly prepared." The view is honestly held. Is the defence available?

T repeats to a group a false and harmful rumour about R, adding that it is "only a rumour." What follows?

A manager knowingly sends a false accusation about an employee to an internal disciplinary officer. Can the manager rely on qualified privilege?

S falsely tells B that a car has never been in an accident. B relies on this and buys it. What is the best conclusion?

An art expert selling a painting states, "In my opinion, this is an original," despite records in her possession proving it is a copy. The buyer relies. What follows?

S says nothing about a fact, makes no partial statement, and has no earlier statement to correct. Under the passage, is silence alone ordinarily misrepresentation?

S truthfully states in January that a shop is licensed. The licence is cancelled before the March sale, but S does not correct the statement. B relies on it. What is the best conclusion?

B discovers the misrepresentation but expressly confirms that the contract will continue. Can B later seek rescission under the passage?

T intentionally walks onto P's land, honestly but mistakenly believing it belongs to T. Is the mistake by itself a defence?

P permits D to enter a garden between 9 a.m. and 10 a.m. D enters at 9:30 a.m. for the permitted purpose. Is D a trespasser?

P revokes V's permission to remain and gives V a reasonable opportunity to leave. V refuses and stays for several hours. What follows?

To escape an immediate wildfire, H crosses P's field by the only safe route and leaves when the danger passes. Is the entry justified?

R crosses a private garden only to shorten a routine journey by five minutes. Can R rely on necessity?

A delivery driver negligently injures P while making an assigned delivery. Is the employer vicariously liable?

A driver is told not to exceed the speed limit but speeds to complete an assigned delivery and causes an accident. What is the best conclusion?

During work, E takes the employer's van on a long trip solely to visit a friend and causes an accident. Is the employer liable under the passage?

P hires an independent contractor to paint an office. The contractor negligently damages a neighbour's car. Is P liable merely because P hired the work?

Which fact is most important in deciding vicarious liability under the passage?

A company unreasonably blocks the only public road for several days. What interest is affected?

The blockage delays all residents, but it also prevents R's ambulance from reaching a hospital and causes R a serious distinct injury. May R sue privately?

P suffers only the same ten-minute delay experienced by every road user. Can P privately sue under the passage?

D intentionally creates a serious and unreasonable obstruction but uses careful equipment. Is lack of negligence conclusive?

Can a temporary obstruction amount to public nuisance?

A university clearly promises a fee waiver to R, expecting R to enrol. R declines another offer and enrols. The university withdraws the waiver without justification. What is the best conclusion?

Related CLAT UG subjects