Judiciary question bank

Law of Torts MCQs for Judiciary, Page 6

Judiciary Law of Torts questions 126-150 of 175, with answer keys and explanations covering negligence, nuisance, defamation, strict liability, vicarious liability, trespass, defences, and damages.

175 questions19 topics126-150 on this page
Start adaptive practiceBrowse Judiciary

Coverage

Topics in this subject

Practice judiciary exam MCQs with answers and explanations across substantive law, procedure, evidence, constitutional law, and state judicial service subjects.

  • Assault and Battery10
  • Contributory and Composite Negligence10
  • Defamation10
  • Defamation Defences10
  • False Imprisonment10
  • General Defences10
  • Legal Damage and Maxims10
  • Malicious Prosecution10
  • Miscellaneous Economic and Personal Torts5
  • Nature and Scope of Tort10
  • Negligence20
  • Nuisance10
  • Occupier's Liability5
  • Remedies and Damages5
  • State Liability5
  • Strict and Absolute Liability10
  • Trespass to Goods5
  • Trespass to Land10
  • Vicarious Liability10
Question 126EasyContributory and Composite Negligence

Contributory negligence means negligence of:

  1. A

    Only the defendant

  2. B

    The plaintiff contributing to the damage

  3. C

    Both parties together in every case

  4. D

    Only a government officer

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: B. The plaintiff contributing to the damage

Contributory negligence means the plaintiff also failed to take reasonable care for his own safety and thereby contributed to the damage.

Source note: R.K. Bangia, Law of Torts

Question 127MediumContributory and Composite Negligence

The modern effect of contributory negligence is generally to:

  1. A

    Completely bar the claim in every case

  2. B

    Reduce damages according to the plaintiff's share in the fault

  3. C

    Convert the claim into contract

  4. D

    Create criminal liability

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: B. Reduce damages according to the plaintiff's share in the fault

Modern law usually treats contributory negligence as a matter of apportionment, so damages are reduced instead of being totally denied.

Source note: R.K. Bangia, Law of Torts

Question 128MediumContributory and Composite Negligence

Composite negligence refers to negligence of:

  1. A

    The plaintiff alone

  2. B

    Two or more defendants causing the same damage to the plaintiff

  3. C

    A judge and police officer together

  4. D

    A minor only

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: B. Two or more defendants causing the same damage to the plaintiff

Composite negligence arises when the negligence of multiple defendants combines to cause one injury to the plaintiff.

Source note: R.K. Bangia, Law of Torts

Question 129MediumContributory and Composite Negligence

In cases of composite negligence, the plaintiff can generally recover:

  1. A

    Nothing unless all defendants are sued

  2. B

    The whole amount from any one of the joint wrongdoers

  3. C

    Only half the amount

  4. D

    Only nominal damages

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: B. The whole amount from any one of the joint wrongdoers

Where defendants are jointly and severally liable, the plaintiff may recover the full amount from any one of them, leaving adjustment between defendants later.

Source note: R.K. Bangia, Law of Torts

Question 130EasyContributory and Composite Negligence

A pedestrian carelessly crossing a road outside a zebra crossing may be guilty of:

  1. A

    Strict liability

  2. B

    Contributory negligence

  3. C

    Absolute privilege

  4. D

    Malicious prosecution

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: B. Contributory negligence

If the pedestrian failed to take reasonable care for personal safety, the court may treat it as contributory negligence and reduce damages.

Source note: R.K. Bangia, Law of Torts

Question 131EasyNuisance

Private nuisance is mainly concerned with:

  1. A

    Injury to reputation

  2. B

    Unreasonable interference with the use or enjoyment of land

  3. C

    Every loud sound in a city

  4. D

    Wrongful detention of goods

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: B. Unreasonable interference with the use or enjoyment of land

Private nuisance protects a person's interest in land, especially against substantial and unreasonable interference.

Source note: R.K. Bangia, Law of Torts

Question 132EasyNuisance

Public nuisance differs from private nuisance because public nuisance:

  1. A

    Can never be a tort

  2. B

    Affects the public or a section of the public at large

  3. C

    Requires ownership of land

  4. D

    Is always intentional

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: B. Affects the public or a section of the public at large

Public nuisance is a common interference with rights enjoyed by the public. Private nuisance concerns private land-based enjoyment.

Source note: R.K. Bangia, Law of Torts

Question 133MediumNuisance

To sue for private nuisance, the plaintiff usually needs:

  1. A

    A mere emotional reaction

  2. B

    Some proprietary or possessory interest in land

  3. C

    A criminal conviction of the defendant

  4. D

    A written contract

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: B. Some proprietary or possessory interest in land

Private nuisance is linked to land. So a plaintiff generally needs ownership, possession, or some legally recognized interest in the affected land.

Source note: R.K. Bangia, Law of Torts

Question 134MediumNuisance

Which of the following is generally not a defence to private nuisance?

  1. A

    Prescription

  2. B

    Statutory authority

  3. C

    Coming to the nuisance

  4. D

    Act of stranger in some cases

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: C. Coming to the nuisance

A defendant cannot usually say that the plaintiff came near the nuisance later. The wrong remains a nuisance if the other elements are proved.

Source note: R.K. Bangia, Law of Torts

Question 135EasyNuisance

Smoke, foul smell, or continuous noise affecting peaceful residence may amount to:

  1. A

    Private nuisance

  2. B

    Conversion

  3. C

    Detinue

  4. D

    Malicious prosecution

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: A. Private nuisance

Such interferences can amount to private nuisance if they are substantial and unreasonable in the circumstances.

Source note: R.K. Bangia, Law of Torts

Question 136EasyStrict and Absolute Liability

The rule in Rylands v. Fletcher is based on liability for:

  1. A

    Escape of a dangerous thing brought onto land for a non-natural use

  2. B

    Every criminal act committed on land

  3. C

    Every contractual breach

  4. D

    Only negligent driving

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: A. Escape of a dangerous thing brought onto land for a non-natural use

Rylands v. Fletcher imposes strict liability when a person brings something likely to do mischief onto land for a non-natural use and it escapes.

Source note: R.K. Bangia, Law of Torts

Question 137MediumStrict and Absolute Liability

Which of the following is an essential requirement of strict liability under Rylands v. Fletcher?

  1. A

    Publication to a third person

  2. B

    Escape from the defendant's land

  3. C

    A criminal intention

  4. D

    Existence of a contract

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: B. Escape from the defendant's land

Escape is a key element. If the dangerous thing does not move out from the defendant's control area, the rule may not apply.

Source note: R.K. Bangia, Law of Torts

Question 138MediumStrict and Absolute Liability

The rule of absolute liability in M.C. Mehta is stricter than Rylands v. Fletcher because:

  1. A

    It applies only when there is a contract

  2. B

    It allows more exceptions

  3. C

    It is for hazardous industries and does not permit the old exceptions

  4. D

    It requires proof of defamation

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: C. It is for hazardous industries and does not permit the old exceptions

Absolute liability was developed for inherently dangerous activities. The enterprise cannot avoid liability by relying on traditional strict-liability exceptions.

Source note: R.K. Bangia, Law of Torts

Question 139EasyStrict and Absolute Liability

Under absolute liability, a hazardous enterprise is liable because it:

  1. A

    Publishes false statements

  2. B

    Keeps a dangerous activity and must bear the cost of harm resulting from it

  3. C

    Has a contract with the victim

  4. D

    Acts only through servants

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: B. Keeps a dangerous activity and must bear the cost of harm resulting from it

The law places a heavier burden on hazardous enterprises because they profit from dangerous activities and are best placed to absorb and prevent the risk.

Source note: R.K. Bangia, Law of Torts

Question 140MediumStrict and Absolute Liability

Which of the following is usually an exception to strict liability under Rylands v. Fletcher but not to absolute liability?

  1. A

    Act of God

  2. B

    Trespass to land

  3. C

    False imprisonment

  4. D

    Defamation

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: A. Act of God

Traditional strict liability recognized several exceptions like act of God. Absolute liability under M.C. Mehta does not accept those old exceptions.

Source note: R.K. Bangia, Law of Torts

Question 141EasyVicarious Liability

Vicarious liability means liability of one person for the tort of another because of:

  1. A

    Friendship only

  2. B

    A special relationship recognized by law

  3. C

    A written apology

  4. D

    A criminal conspiracy

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: B. A special relationship recognized by law

The law sometimes fixes liability on one person because of a legally recognized relationship, such as employer and employee.

Source note: R.K. Bangia, Law of Torts

Question 142EasyVicarious Liability

An employer is generally liable for the torts of an employee committed:

  1. A

    After retirement

  2. B

    In the course of employment

  3. C

    Before appointment

  4. D

    Only on holidays

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: B. In the course of employment

The key test is whether the wrongful act was done in the course of employment. If yes, the employer may be liable.

Source note: R.K. Bangia, Law of Torts

Question 143MediumVicarious Liability

If a servant goes on a complete frolic of his own, the master is generally:

  1. A

    Still liable in every case

  2. B

    Not liable because the act falls outside the course of employment

  3. C

    Liable only in defamation

  4. D

    Criminally liable automatically

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: B. Not liable because the act falls outside the course of employment

A frolic of one's own means the employee stepped completely outside employment duties. In that case, vicarious liability usually does not arise.

Source note: R.K. Bangia, Law of Torts

Question 144MediumVicarious Liability

An unauthorized mode of doing an authorized act may still make the employer liable if the act was done:

  1. A

    Wholly outside employment

  2. B

    In the course of employment

  3. C

    After the contract ended

  4. D

    By an unrelated stranger

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: B. In the course of employment

If the servant was doing an authorized job in an improper way, the employer may still be liable because the act remains connected to employment.

Source note: R.K. Bangia, Law of Torts

Question 145MediumVicarious Liability

The general rule regarding an independent contractor is that the employer is:

  1. A

    Always vicariously liable

  2. B

    Generally not vicariously liable, subject to exceptions

  3. C

    Always criminally liable

  4. D

    Never liable in any circumstance

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: B. Generally not vicariously liable, subject to exceptions

Because the contractor controls the manner of work, the employer is usually not vicariously liable. But exceptions exist, especially where duty is non-delegable or the act is inherently hazardous.

Source note: R.K. Bangia, Law of Torts

Question 146EasyTrespass to Land

Trespass to land is committed by:

  1. A

    Wrongful entry upon another's land

  2. B

    Publishing false statements

  3. C

    Breaking a contract

  4. D

    Carelessly driving on a public road

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: A. Wrongful entry upon another's land

Trespass to land protects possession of land. Direct and unlawful entry is enough.

Source note: R.K. Bangia, Law of Torts

Question 147EasyTrespass to Land

Trespass to land is generally actionable:

  1. A

    Only on proof of actual damage

  2. B

    Per se, even without proof of actual damage

  3. C

    Only when a house is destroyed

  4. D

    Only when police are informed

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: B. Per se, even without proof of actual damage

Because possession itself is protected, trespass to land is usually actionable without proof of actual damage.

Source note: R.K. Bangia, Law of Torts

Question 148MediumTrespass to Land

If a person lawfully enters land and later remains there after permission is withdrawn, it may become:

  1. A

    Conversion

  2. B

    A continuing trespass

  3. C

    Defamation

  4. D

    No wrong at all

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: B. A continuing trespass

Entry may begin lawfully but continued presence after permission is revoked can become a continuing trespass.

Source note: R.K. Bangia, Law of Torts

Question 149MediumTrespass to Land

Throwing stones onto another's land without entering it personally may still amount to:

  1. A

    Trespass to land

  2. B

    Malicious prosecution

  3. C

    Detinue only

  4. D

    Qualified privilege

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: A. Trespass to land

Trespass can be committed directly by causing an object to enter another's land, even without the defendant's body entering it.

Source note: R.K. Bangia, Law of Torts

Question 150EasyTrespass to Land

Entry upon another's land to save life in an emergency may be justified by:

  1. A

    Absolute privilege

  2. B

    Necessity

  3. C

    Defamation

  4. D

    Prescription

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: B. Necessity

Necessity may justify what would otherwise be trespass if the entry is reasonably required to prevent serious harm.

Source note: R.K. Bangia, Law of Torts

Continue revision

ADR and Arbitration55 questions with explanationsBSA240 questions with explanationsCode of Civil Procedure 1908160 questions with explanationsConstitutional Law200 questions with explanationsCriminal Law (BNS 2023)175 questions with explanationsEnvironmental Law120 questions with explanations