Question 1 Which one of the following best describes the content of the passage as a whole? AAn analysis of similarities and differences between the legal systems of England and the United States BA re-evaluation of two legal systems with the use of examples CA contrast between the types of reasons embodied in the United States and English legal systems DAn explanation of how two distinct visions of the law shaped the development of legal reasoning. An act is considered as violating a statute if it violates the rules defined in the statute. Question 3 From the discussion of Wills in the third paragraph it can be inferred that substantive arguments as to the validity of a Will might be considered under which one of the following circumstances? Sign up to take a FREE test. Clearly the author is stating the consequences of the use of two systems in the two countries.
|Published (Last):||15 March 2005|
|PDF File Size:||11.48 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||5.83 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Which country joined WTO in August ? Apply the principle to the facts given below and select the most appropriate answer. If a man fails to do so then he must be made responsible to all natural consequences of its escape.
B misappropriated the amount. Some of the gold and silver ornaments were seized from the plaintiff and were kept in the police station custody. The duty constable appropriated the gold ornaments and escaped to a foreign country. The plaintiff after being acquitted brought an action against the State for the compensation. In this case, compensation is DECISION: a Payable as there is misappropriation by the servants of the State b Payable due to the fact that police constable has escaped to a foreign country c Payable by the police constable himself and not by the State d Not payable as the act was committed in discharge of sovereign function.
People can be joint tort-feasors in case of common action, in fact or in law. In an action for damages brought against the owners of the dogs, if one of them puts a defence claiming that he was liable for one half only of the damage, then which one of the following statements is legally sustainable in the above case? 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.
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 bum injuries. The defendants are DECISION: a Not liable because the injury to plaintiff is not foreseeable b Liable because they should have completed the work before they left c Not liable because they acted reasonably d Liable because they acted unreasonably.
The patient is to be operated upon. As a result of faulty oxygen supply, the patient dies on the operation theatre table, then DECISION: a B would not be liable because the surgeon was negligent b B would be liable because there is master and servant relationship between B and the surgeon c B would not be liable because there is no master and servant relationship between B and the surgeon d B would not be vicariously liable because surgery is a highly skilled work on which B would have no control.
A is aware that B does not know Urdu. B goes to C who knows Urdu and the letter is read over by C to him. B sues A for defamation. DECISION: a A is liable b A is not liable because he addresses the letter to B and not to C c A is not liable because there is no publication of defamatory statement d A is not liable because he is unaware that the letter can be read over by someone else to B The dust from the machine polluted the atmosphere and caused inconvenience to P and his patients.
There must be a total restraint of the person and the onus of proving reasonable cause is on the defendant. A paid Rs. A waited for. A came out, however, denied to pay Rs. A sued B for false imprisonment. That he was prosecuted by the defendant. That the proceeding complained was terminated in favour of the present plaintiff. That the prosecution was instituted against him without any just or reasonable cause. That the prosecution was instituted with a malicious intention, that is, not with the mere intention of getting the law into effect, but with an intention, which was wrongful in fact.
That he suffered damage to his reputation or to the safety of person, or to security of his property. Subsequently, Railway Co. Railway Co. B sued Railway Co. In the light of these facts which of the following statements is true? He gave to the bearer to serve B. The bearer while approaching B, loses the balance and the glass drops out of his tray.
DECISION: a A has not committed any offence b A has committed the offence of murder c A has committed the offence of attempt to murder d A has not committed an offence of attempt to murder because nothing happened to B.
A person abets an offence, who abets either the commission of an offence, or the commission of an act which would be an offence, if committed by a person capable by law of committing an offence with the same intention or knowledge as that of the abettor.
A criminal conspiracy takes place when two or more people get together and plan to commit a crime and then take some action toward carrying out that plan. The action taken does not have to be a crime itself to further the conspiracy. X in pursuance of the conspiracy procures the poison and delivers it to Y in order that he may administer; it to Z.
What offences X and Y have committed? Whoever dishonestly misappropriates or converts to his own use any movable property, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both. His wife points out after some days that the umbrella does not belong to them but to Z. After coming to know that, A dishonestly keeps the umbrella.
The daughter pleas lack of consideration when the uncle seeks to enforce the contract. She says that the uncle is a stranger to the consideration and so he cannot enforce the contract. The daughter DECISION: a Will succeed because uncle being a stranger to the consideration cannot enforce it b Will not succeed because uncle is a near relative and in such cases consideration is not necessary c Cannot succeed because consideration might move from any person d None of the above.
Parties to contract should be capable of entering in to contract, only then they can lay the foundation of a valid contract. He paid Rs. A is liable to pay Rs. Ais liable to pay remaining Rs. A is liable to refund of Rs. Neither B is liable to refund Rs. In India, the reckoning date for the determination of the age of the juvenile is the a date of offence c date of judgment d date of arrest.
Which of the following rights is not available to the citizens of India under Article 21 of the Constitution?
Delhi Law Academy
AILET Previous Year Question Papers – All India Law Entrance Test Paper Pdf