MCQ on Tort

31. Action for defamation can be brought by
(a) an individual.
(b) a partnership fi rm.
(c) a company.
(d) both (a) and (c).

32. Making fair comment on matters of public
interest is
(a) a defence to an action for defamation.
(b) no defence to an action for defamation.
(c) a partial defence to an action for defamation.
(d) none of the above.

33. No action for defamation lies in cases of
(a) absolute privileges.
(b) qualifi ed privileges.
(c) both (a) and (b).
(d) neither (a) nor (b).

34. A man’s reputation is his property, and if possible, more valuable, than other property. It was so observed in
(a) Monson vs Tunsands Ltd.
(b) Dixon vs Holden
(c) Youssoupoff vs M. G. M. Pictures Ltd.
(d) Austic vs Dowling

35. The maxim ‘res-ipsa loquitur’ is a
(a) rule of law.
(b) rule of procedure.
(c) rule of evidence.
(d) rule of negligence.

36. The doctrine ‘res-ipsa loquitur’ was applied by the Supreme Court in
(a) Alka vs Union of India
(b) Asa Ram vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi
(c) Municipal Corporation of Delhi vs Subhagwanti
(d) Jasbir Kaur vs State of Punjab

37. Conspiracy is
(a) a crime.
(b) a tort.
(c) both a crime and a tort.
(d) either (a) or (b).

38. The rule of strict liability is contained in
(a) Donoghue vs Stevenson
(b) Rylands vs Fletcher
(c) Lloyd vs Grace, Smith & Co.
(d) Ormord vs Orosville Motors Service Ltd.

39. Which of the following are the exception to
the strict liability rule
(a) volenti non fi t injuria.
(b) vis major.
(c) statutory authority.
(d) all the above.

40. The rule of strict liability is applicable
(a) in England only.
(b) in India only.
(c) in England and India both.
(d) neither in England nor in India.
Answers –
31. (d) 32. (a) 33. (a) 34. (b) 35. (c) 36. (c) 37. (c) 38. (b) 39. (d) 40. (c)