In Smith v. Baker, the plaintiff, a servant of the defendants, Railway contractors, was employed in drilling holes in a rock cutting, and was aware of the danger caused by a crane continually swinging crates of stone above his head. A stone fell out of a crate and injured him. He brought an action of negligence against the defendants who pleaded volenti non fit injuria. It was held that

In Smith v. Baker, the plaintiff, a servant of the defendants, Railway contractors, was employed in drilling holes in a rock cutting, and was aware of the danger caused by a crane continually swinging crates of stone above his head. A stone fell out of a crate and injured him. He brought an action of negligence against the defendants who pleaded volenti non fit injuria. It was held that Correct Answer The plaintiff's knowledge of the risk justified that he had voluntarily undertaken it

Bissoy MCQ

Related Questions

X' was working at a place over which a crane swung carrying heavy stones. Both 'X' and his employer knew that the crane so swung and recognized the possibility of danger if a stone fell from the crane. No warning was given 'X' of the swinging time of the crane whenever this took place. Once a heavy stone fell from the swinging crane and injured 'X'. In a claim for torts, the employer pleaded that there was no liability on the basis of the principle volenti non fit injuria. This plea-
B' was under the regular employment of 'A' as a driver of his mobile crane. He let the crane together with 'B' as driver to 'C'. In the course of loading a ship, 'X' was injured by negligent working of the crane by 'B'. At the time of the accident 'C' had the immediate control and direction of the operations to be executed. The working of the crane and the manipulation of its control, however, remained with 'B', In a suit by 'X' against 'C', is:
Following are good defences to an action in torts:
1. Volenti non fit injuria
2. Scienti non fit injuria
3. Vis major
Choose the correct answer by using the given below
Plaintiff was the chairperson of the town meeting. The defendant having been very vociferous, a motion was made and carried out by majority that the defendant be turned out. The defendant said he would rather pull out the plaintiff than he turned out. He advanced menacingly towards the plaintiff with clinched fists, but his advance was prevented by a warden. Decide appropriate civil action against the defendant for his action against the plaintiff.
A man bought 25 crates of oranges for Rs.10,000. He lost 5 crates. In order to earn a total profit of25% of the total cost, he would have to sell each of theremaining crates at
A man bought 25 crates of oranges for 10000. He lost 5 crates. In order to earn a total profit of 25% of the total cost, he would have to sell each of the remaining crates at = ?
A crate of egg holds one rotten egg out of every 25 egg in it. If 5 out of 8 rotten eggs are unusable and there are total 10 unusable eggs in the crate,then calculate the number of eggs in the crate.
X, a mill owner, employed independent contractors to construct a reservoir for his mill. During the course of construction the contractors came upon some old shafts and passages on the land of X. The contractors did not block them. When the reservior was filed, water burst through the old shafts and flooded the mines of 'Y'. 'Y' sued 'X'. 'X' was held liable. He could have not been liable if he could show that
A' is the owner of a furniture shop and 'B' is employed in that shop as a delivery-man. In which of the following cases, 'A' would be liable in a suit filed by the injured plaintiff 'C' for the action of 'B'?
Case 1. One day, 'B' was on his delivery route when he met his friend 'D'. 'D' requested 'B' to drop him at the railway station as he was getting late for the train. 'B' drove very fast and while returning back from the railway station, 'B' negligently ran over 'C'.
Case 2. One day, 'B' was on his delivery route when he met 'D'. As both had met after long time, 'B' decided to have lunch with his friend 'D'. 'B' drove out of his way to a nearby restaurant and had lunch there. While driving back from there, 'B' negligently ran over 'C'.
Principle: A plaintiff who suffers some injury will be entitled to receive compensation even if he suffers no loss.
Factual Situation: Reddy was a strong political worker of Party X. He was proceeding to the poling booth at about 7:30 am, to cast his vote in favour of Mr. Naik, his party candidate. On the way, the State Police officials suspected Reddy to be an anti-social element and took him into custody for questioning. Reddy pleaded with the officials that he was a genuine voter and had no previous criminal records and requested them to allow him to cast his vote. The officials allegedly detained him in custody till about 4:45 pm and thereafter released him, recording that they could not find any thing against him. By the time Reddy reached the poling booth the polling time was over and he could not vote for Mr. Naik. When the results were declared Mr. Naik got a Majority of over 6000 votes and Party X got the majority to form the Government. Reddy files a suit for compensation against the State.