Site navigation

Generally, there is no requirement of showing a mental element to prove a wrong in tort. But in cases like ________ the state of mind of the person committing the tort is relevant for ascertaining…

Question and options

Generally, there is no requirement of showing a mental element to prove a wrong in tort. But in cases like ________ the state of mind of the person committing the tort is relevant for ascertaining his/her liability.
  1. assault, false imprisonment, malicious prosecution, battery
  2. vicarious liability of a master for a servant's wrongs
  3. trespass to land, conversion and detinue
  4. strict liability and absolute liability

Answer and explanation

Correct answer: A - assault, false imprisonment, malicious prosecution, battery
Intention or malice matters in torts such as assault, battery, false imprisonment and malicious prosecution, where malice is an essential element. Trespass to land, conversion and detinue are actionable even if the defendant acted innocently or by mistake, and strict and absolute liability and a master's vicarious liability arise without any fault of mind in the person held liable.

Practice for these exams

Related question papers

Related exam syllabi

More solved explanations in Nature, definition & essentials of tort