CLAT UG question bank

Legal Reasoning MCQs for CLAT UG, Page 4

CLAT UG Legal Reasoning questions 72-95 of 310, with answer keys and explanations covering self-contained legal principles, factual application, changes in outcome, rights, duties, liability, and remedies.

310 questions61 topics72-95 on this page
Start adaptive practiceBrowse 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

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 72MediumPromissory Estoppel and Public Interest

P buys equipment before receiving any promise from D. D later makes a promise concerning the equipment. Can the earlier purchase establish reliance?

  1. A

    Yes, because every purchase is reliance.

  2. B

    Yes, if the equipment was expensive.

  3. C

    No, the purchase preceded and was not induced by the promise.

  4. D

    No, because promises can never concern equipment.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: C. No, the purchase preceded and was not induced by the promise.

C applies the requirement that reliance must be connected to the promise.

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

Question 73HardPromissory Estoppel and Public Interest

An officer promises a licence that a statute expressly forbids the authority from issuing. The applicant spends money in reliance. Can estoppel compel the licence?

  1. A

    Yes, reliance always overrides legislation.

  2. B

    No, estoppel cannot compel an act prohibited by statute.

  3. C

    Yes, if the officer acted honestly.

  4. D

    No, but only because the promise was oral.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: B. No, estoppel cannot compel an act prohibited by statute.

B follows the express statutory-prohibition exception.

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

Question 74HardPromissory Estoppel and Public Interest

A transport authority departs from a promise and proves that compliance would create a grave, evidence-based safety risk. What is the best conclusion?

  1. A

    The promise must be enforced regardless of danger.

  2. B

    Any administrative preference defeats estoppel.

  3. C

    Public authorities are never subject to estoppel.

  4. D

    The authority may resist enforcement because it proved an overriding public interest.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: D. The authority may resist enforcement because it proved an overriding public interest.

D applies the public-interest exception supported by evidence.

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

Question 75MediumPromissory Estoppel and Public Interest

Which argument by a public authority is least sufficient on its own?

  1. A

    A statutory provision prohibits performance.

  2. B

    Verified evidence shows a grave public danger.

  3. C

    Changing course is administratively more convenient.

  4. D

    The claimant did not act on the promise.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: C. Changing course is administratively more convenient.

C is only a bare claim of convenience, which the passage declares insufficient.

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

Passage or principleOriginal legal principle and fact scenarios

A person who, for a non-natural use of land, brings onto it a dangerous thing likely to cause harm if it escapes is strictly liable for damage naturally resulting from its escape. Strict liability does not require proof of negligence. There is no escape where the dangerous thing causes injury entirely within the defendant's premises. Liability may be defeated where the damage results solely from the claimant's own voluntary act, an unforeseeable act of a stranger over whom the defendant had no control, or an extraordinary natural event that reasonable foresight could not anticipate. An ordinary domestic use of land is not non-natural merely because an accident occurs. Apply only these principles.

Question 76MediumStrict Liability and Escape

A factory stores a large industrial reservoir of toxic liquid. It escapes into N's land and causes foreseeable damage despite careful maintenance. Is the factory liable?

  1. A

    No, because careful maintenance disproves negligence.

  2. B

    Yes, the elements of strict liability are satisfied despite absence of negligence.

  3. C

    No, because liquids can never be dangerous things.

  4. D

    Yes, but only if the factory intended the escape.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: B. Yes, the elements of strict liability are satisfied despite absence of negligence.

B applies non-natural use, danger, escape, and resulting damage.

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

Question 77MediumStrict Liability and Escape

A dangerous chemical injures an employee but remains entirely within D's premises. Does the rule in the passage apply?

  1. A

    No, the required escape from the premises is absent.

  2. B

    Yes, every internal accident is an escape.

  3. C

    Yes, because negligence is presumed.

  4. D

    No, because employees cannot suffer damage.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: A. No, the required escape from the premises is absent.

A is correct because the passage requires movement beyond the defendant's premises.

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

Question 78HardStrict Liability and Escape

Without permission, C deliberately opens D's secure tank solely to release its contents onto C's own land. Can D rely on a defence?

  1. A

    No, strict liability admits no defence.

  2. B

    No, because the tank belonged to D.

  3. C

    Yes, if the damage resulted solely from C's voluntary act.

  4. D

    Yes, whenever the claimant enters D's land.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: C. Yes, if the damage resulted solely from C's voluntary act.

C applies the defence based solely on the claimant's voluntary conduct.

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

Question 79HardStrict Liability and Escape

An unknown saboteur, whom D could not control or reasonably foresee, breaks a secure pipe and causes an escape. What is the best conclusion?

  1. A

    D is necessarily liable because ownership is conclusive.

  2. B

    The saboteur becomes D's employee.

  3. C

    The event is an ordinary domestic use.

  4. D

    D may rely on the unforeseeable act of a stranger as a defence.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: D. D may rely on the unforeseeable act of a stranger as a defence.

D matches the stated stranger defence.

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

Question 80MediumStrict Liability and Escape

Water from an ordinary household bucket accidentally spills inside the home. Which element is most clearly missing?

  1. A

    Existence of land

  2. B

    Non-natural use involving an accumulated dangerous thing

  3. C

    Ownership of the bucket

  4. D

    A voluntary act by a stranger

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: B. Non-natural use involving an accumulated dangerous thing

B follows from the passage's distinction concerning ordinary domestic use.

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

Passage or principleOriginal legal principle and fact scenarios

Trespass to goods is a direct and wrongful physical interference with goods in another person's possession. Moving, damaging, or using the goods without lawful justification may suffice even if the interference is temporary. Conversion is an intentional dealing with goods that seriously denies or contradicts the right of the person entitled to possess them. Selling another's goods, destroying them, or refusing to return them after a proper demand may amount to conversion. A minor or momentary interference may be trespass without being conversion. An honest mistake about ownership is not by itself a defence to either wrong. Consent or lawful authority defeats liability. Apply only these principles.

Question 81MediumTrespass to Goods and Conversion

Without permission, D briefly moves P's bicycle to obstruct P but returns it undamaged. What is the best conclusion?

  1. A

    D cannot be liable because the bicycle was returned.

  2. B

    D may be liable in trespass for direct wrongful interference.

  3. C

    D is liable in conversion because every movement is a serious denial of rights.

  4. D

    D is protected by an honest-mistake defence.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: B. D may be liable in trespass for direct wrongful interference.

B applies the rule on temporary direct interference.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 9, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Question 82MediumTrespass to Goods and Conversion

D intentionally sells P's laptop without permission. Which wrong is most clearly established?

  1. A

    Conversion, because the sale seriously contradicts P's possessory right

  2. B

    No wrong, because D did not destroy the laptop

  3. C

    Trespass only, because sale can never be conversion

  4. D

    No wrong unless D knew the laptop's price

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: A. Conversion, because the sale seriously contradicts P's possessory right

A follows from the express example of selling another's goods.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 9, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Question 83HardTrespass to Goods and Conversion

R borrows a camera lawfully but refuses to return it after P makes a proper demand. What is the best conclusion?

  1. A

    The original consent permanently defeats every claim.

  2. B

    Borrowing automatically transfers ownership.

  3. C

    R may be liable in conversion because the refusal seriously denies P's right.

  4. D

    R is liable only if the camera is damaged.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: C. R may be liable in conversion because the refusal seriously denies P's right.

C applies the stated rule on refusal after a proper demand.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 9, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Question 84HardTrespass to Goods and Conversion

D honestly but wrongly believes that P's machine belongs to D and destroys it. Is the mistake a complete defence?

  1. A

    Yes, every honest belief creates ownership.

  2. B

    Yes, because destruction is not interference.

  3. C

    No, but only if D made a profit.

  4. D

    No, an honest mistake about ownership is not by itself a defence.

View answer and explanation

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

D directly follows the final paragraph.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 9, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Question 85MediumTrespass to Goods and Conversion

A court officer seizes goods under valid legal authority. Is the seizure wrongful under the passage?

  1. A

    Yes, every seizure is conversion.

  2. B

    No, lawful authority defeats liability.

  3. C

    Yes, because consent is the only defence.

  4. D

    No, only when the goods have no value.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: B. No, lawful authority defeats liability.

B applies the lawful-authority defence.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 9, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Passage or principleOriginal legal principle and fact scenarios

A contract is induced by undue influence when one party is in a position to dominate the will of another and uses that position to obtain an unfair advantage. A position of dominance may arise from real or apparent authority, a fiduciary relationship, or the other party's age, illness, or distress. Mere influence, affection, or advice is insufficient. There must be use of the dominant position and an unfair advantage. Where the relationship permits domination and the transaction appears unconscionable, the dominant party must prove that the agreement was not induced by undue influence. A court may set aside the agreement absolutely or on fair terms. Apply only these principles.

Question 86MediumUndue Influence in Contracts

Which combination is necessary to establish undue influence?

  1. A

    A dominant position, its use, and an unfair advantage

  2. B

    Affection and a later disagreement

  3. C

    Any advice followed by a contract

  4. D

    A written agreement between strangers

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: A. A dominant position, its use, and an unfair advantage

A states the elements in the first paragraph.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 9, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Question 87HardUndue Influence in Contracts

A financial adviser uses a client's trust to obtain the client's valuable property for a nominal price. What is the best conclusion?

  1. A

    No undue influence can arise in financial dealings.

  2. B

    The low price is irrelevant in every case.

  3. C

    Undue influence may be established through the fiduciary position and unfair advantage.

  4. D

    Only physical force can dominate a will.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: C. Undue influence may be established through the fiduciary position and unfair advantage.

C applies dominance through a fiduciary relationship and an unfair transaction.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 9, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Question 88MediumUndue Influence in Contracts

A friend strongly recommends an investment, but has no dominance and receives no advantage. Does the passage establish undue influence?

  1. A

    Yes, every recommendation is undue influence.

  2. B

    No, advice without dominance and unfair advantage is insufficient.

  3. C

    Yes, because friendship is fiduciary in every case.

  4. D

    No, only because the advice was oral.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: B. No, advice without dominance and unfair advantage is insufficient.

B follows from the distinction between influence and undue influence.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 9, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Question 89HardUndue Influence in Contracts

An elderly dependent transfers a house to a caregiver for almost nothing, and the relationship permits domination. Who must show that undue influence did not induce the transfer?

  1. A

    The registrar alone

  2. B

    The elderly person in every case

  3. C

    No one, because the agreement is written

  4. D

    The caregiver as the dominant party

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: D. The caregiver as the dominant party

D applies the burden rule for an apparently unconscionable transaction.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 9, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Question 90MediumUndue Influence in Contracts

What remedy may a court grant under the passage?

  1. A

    Imprisonment in every case

  2. B

    Automatic transfer to the State

  3. C

    Setting aside the agreement absolutely or on fair terms

  4. D

    Enforcement without examining fairness

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: C. Setting aside the agreement absolutely or on fair terms

C is the remedy stated in the final paragraph.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 9, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Passage or principleOriginal legal principle and fact scenarios

A contract is frustrated when, after its formation and without fault of either party, an unforeseen event makes performance impossible or transforms the obligation into something radically different from what was agreed. The contract is discharged from the time of that event. Mere increase in expense, inconvenience, or reduced profitability does not ordinarily frustrate a contract. Nor may a party rely on an event that the party caused or deliberately accepted as a contractual risk. If the contract itself provides what will happen on the event, that agreed term governs and the doctrine of frustration is unnecessary. Apply only these principles.

Question 91MediumFrustration of Contract

A hall hired for a concert is destroyed by an unforeseen fire without either party's fault before the event. What is the best conclusion?

  1. A

    The contract may be frustrated because the agreed performance has become impossible.

  2. B

    The hirer must rebuild the hall.

  3. C

    A contract can never end after formation.

  4. D

    The fire is irrelevant unless the concert was profitable.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: A. The contract may be frustrated because the agreed performance has become impossible.

A applies unforeseen impossibility without fault.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 10, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Question 92MediumFrustration of Contract

Raw-material prices rise by 20 percent, making performance less profitable but still possible. Is the contract frustrated?

  1. A

    Yes, every cost increase frustrates a contract.

  2. B

    Yes, because profitability is guaranteed.

  3. C

    No, a mere increase in expense or reduced profit is ordinarily insufficient.

  4. D

    No, but only if prices later fall.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: C. No, a mere increase in expense or reduced profit is ordinarily insufficient.

C applies the rule concerning expense and profitability.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 10, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Question 93HardFrustration of Contract

D voluntarily sells the only machine required to perform D's contract and then claims impossibility. Can D rely on frustration?

  1. A

    Yes, any impossibility is sufficient.

  2. B

    No, D caused the event relied upon.

  3. C

    Yes, because machines can be sold.

  4. D

    No, only because the buyer knew of the contract.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: B. No, D caused the event relied upon.

B applies the rule excluding self-induced frustration.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 10, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Question 94HardFrustration of Contract

A contract expressly states how the parties will proceed if a named port closes. The port closes. Which rule applies first?

  1. A

    The contract is automatically void from the beginning.

  2. B

    The court must ignore the agreed clause.

  3. C

    The more profitable party chooses the result.

  4. D

    The contractual clause governing port closure applies.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: D. The contractual clause governing port closure applies.

D follows from the agreed-risk rule in the final paragraph.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 10, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Question 95HardFrustration of Contract

Which event most strongly supports frustration under the passage?

  1. A

    A short delay that causes minor inconvenience

  2. B

    An unforeseen legal prohibition that makes the promised activity unlawful

  3. C

    A lower-than-expected profit margin

  4. D

    A risk expressly allocated to one party

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: B. An unforeseen legal prohibition that makes the promised activity unlawful

B makes lawful performance impossible and radically changes the obligation.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 10, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Continue revision

English Language310 questions with explanationsCurrent Affairs including General Knowledge310 questions with explanationsLogical Reasoning310 questions with explanationsQuantitative Techniques310 questions with explanations