0
You visited us 0 times! Enjoying our articles? Unlock Full Access!
Question

__________ is an established defence when it is proved that the plaintiff failed to take reasonable care of himself and thus contributes to his injuries.
  1. Self injury
  2. Contributory negligence
  3. Volenti non fit injuria
  4. None of the above

A
Contributory negligence
B
Self injury
C
Volenti non fit injuria
D
None of the above
Solution
Verified by Toppr

Contributory negligence is the offended party's inability to practice sensible consideration for their security. This all inclusive law rule can bar healing or decrease the measure of compensation an offended party gets if their activities improved the probability that an accident happened.

Was this answer helpful?
0
Similar Questions
Q1
__________ is an established defence when it is proved that the plaintiff failed to take reasonable care of himself and thus contributes to his injuries.
View Solution
Q2
Principle : A citizen is expected to take reasonable duty of care while driving on the road and not to cause injuries to any person.
Facts : X, the owner of a car, asked his friend Y to drive the car to his office. As the car was near his (X's) office, it hit a pedestrian P on account 'Y's negligent driving and injured him seriously. P sued X for damages.
The standard of care generally used in cases of negligence is the ____________________.

View Solution
Q3
LEGAL PRINCIPLE: (1) Negligence is the omission to do something which reasonable man, guided upon those considerations which ordinarily regulate the conduct of human affairs, would do or doing something which a prudent or reasonable man would not do.
(2) Defendant's duty of care depends on the reasonable foreseeability of injury which may be caused to the plaintiff on breach of duty.
FACTS: The defendant employees of the Municipal Corporation opened a manhole on the street and in the evening left the manhole open and covered it by a canvas shelter, unattended and surrounded by warning lamps. The plaintiff, an eight years old boy, took one of the lamps into the shelter and was playing with it there, when he stumbled over it and fell into the manhole. A violent explosion followed and the plaintiff suffered burn injuries. The defendants ______.
View Solution
Q4
Principle : A citizen is expected to take reasonable duty of care while driving on the road and not to cause injuries to any person.

Facts : X, the owner of a car, asked his friend Y to drive the car to his office. As the car was near his (X's) office, it hit a pedestrian P on account 'Y's negligent driving and injured him seriously. P sued X for damages.

Two persons are said to be joint tort-feasors when ______________.


View Solution
Q5
LEGAL PRINCIPLES:
1. Negligence is the omission to do something which a reasonable man, guided upon those considerations which ordinarily regulate the conduct of human affairs, would do or doing something which a prudent or reasonable man would not do.
2.Defendant's duty of care depends of the reasonable foreseeability of injury which may be caused to the plaintiff on breach of duty.

FACTUAL SITUATION: The defendants employees of the Municipal Corporation opened a manhole open an covered it by a canvass shelter, unattended and surrounded by warning lamps. The plaintiff, an eight years old boy, took one of the lamps into the shelter and was playing with it there, when he stumbled over it and fell into the manhole. A violent explosion followed and the plaintiff suffered burn injuries.

The defendants are _______________.

View Solution