top of page

Law of torts MCQs

1. Easement is a right

(a) in rem.

(b) in personam.

(c) neither (a) nor (b).

(d) in rem in general but in personam in exceptional cases

Ans(a) 

2. Damages awarded for tortious liabilities are -

(a) liquidated.

(b) unliquidated.

(c) penal.

(d) none of these.

Ans  (b) 

3. Defamation by spoken words or gestures is known as

(a) innuendo.

(b) slander.

(c) libel.

(d) none of these.

Ans  (b) 

4. The principle facts speak for themselves is expressed by the maxim

(a) Ubi jus ibi remedium.

(b) Res Ipso Loquitor.

(c) Novus Actus Interveniens.

(d) Causa Causams.

Ans  (b) 

5. The liability of a master for acts of his servant in law of torts is called

(a) absolute liability.

(b) tortious liability,

(c) vicarious liability.

(d) none of these.

Ans  (c)

6. The case of Reylands vs Fletcher has laid down the principle of

(a) defamation.

(b) conspiracy.

(c) strict liability of land owner.

(d) none of these.

Ans   (c)

7. Kasturilal vs State of UP is related to

(a) contractual liability of the state.

(b) vicarious liability of the state.

(c) fraud of the state.

(d) none of these.

Ans (b) 

8. The principle of privily of contract was held to be not applicable in an action for tort in

(a) Winterbottom vs Wright, (1842) 10M&W 109

(b) Donoghue vs Stevenson, (1932) AC 562

(c) Grant vs Australian Knitting Mills Ltd.,(1936) AC 85

(d) Ashby vs White, (1703)2 Ld Raym 938

Ans  (b) 

9. The tort of deceit owes its origin to

(a) Pasley vs Freeman, (1789) 3 TR 51

(b) Lumley vs Gye, (1853) 2 E&B 216

(c) Rylands vs Fletcher, (1868) LR 3 HL330

(d) Winsmore vs Greenbank, (1745) Willes 577

Ans  (a) 

10. The tort of inducement a breach of contract finds its origin in -

(a) Lumley vs Gye

(b) Rookes vs Barnard

(c) Donoghue vs Stevenson

(d) Rylands vs Fletcher

Ans  (a)

11. The tort of intimidation was propounded in

(a) Winterbottom vs Wright.

(b) Pasley vs Freeman.

(c) Winsmore vs Greenbank.

(d) Rookes vs Barnard.

Ans D

12. The rule of strict liability is based on the decision in

(a) Donoghue vs Stevenson.

(b) Rylands vs Fletcher.

(c) Lumley vs Gye.

(d) Champman vs Pickersgill.

Ans B

13. The principle ubi jus ibi remedium was recognized in -

(a) Winterbottom vs Wright.

(b) Champman vs Pickersgill.

(c) Ashby vs White

(d) Rylands vs Fletcher

Ans C

14. Tort is a violation of

(a) a right in personam.

(b) a right in rem.

(c) both right in personam and a right in rem.

(d) neither a right in personam nor a right in rem.

Ans B

15. Law of tort has developed mainly through

(a) customs and precedents.

(b) judicial decisions.

(c) enactments.

(d) all the above.

Ans B

16. ubi jus ibi remedius means

(a) where there is a right, there is a remedy.

(b) there is no remedy without a wrong.

(c) there is no wrong without a remedy.

(d) there is no right without a remedy.

Ans C

17. Maxim injurier sine damno means

(a) violation of a legal right without any damage.

(b) violation of a legal right with damage.

(c) damage without violation of legal right.

(d) no damage and no violation of legal right.

Ans A

18. The maxim injurier sine damno has been explained in

(a) Donoghue vs Stevenson.

(b) Winterbottom vs Wright

(c) Ashby vs White

(d) Lumley vs Gye

Ans C

19. Maxim Dar num sine injurier means

(a) damage without infringement of legal right.

(b) damage with infringement of legal right.

(c) infringement of legal right without damage.

(d) infringement of legal right with damage.

Ans A

20. In India the maxim Dar num sine injurier has been propounded in

(a) R Seetharammayya vs Mahalaksh mamma

(b) Vishnu Dutt vs Board of H. S. and Intermediate Education, UP

(c) Town Area Committee vs Prabhu Day al

(d) All the above

Ans D

4 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All
bottom of page