Site navigation

Match List-I with List-II List-I - Legal Doctrine etc.List-II - Case law (A). Negligence (I). Municipal…

Winterbottom v. Wright (1842), which confined the duty of care by privity of contract and is a landmark in the development of negligence, pairs with negligence (A-III);…

Choose your answer

Match List-I with List-II

List-I - Legal Doctrine etc.List-II - Case law
(A). Negligence(I). Municipal Corporation Delhi v Subhagwanti
(B). Strict liability(II). Rylands v Fletcher
(C). Res ipsa loquitur(III). Winterbottom v Wright
(D). Nuisance(IV). Campbell v Paddington Corporation
Select one answer
Answer and explanation

Correct answer C

Winterbottom v. Wright (1842), which confined the duty of care by privity of contract and is a landmark in the development of negligence, pairs with negligence (A-III); Rylands v. Fletcher (1868) laid down strict liability for the escape of dangerous things brought onto land (B-II); Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Subhagwanti (1966), the Chandni Chowk clock tower collapse, applied res ipsa loquitur (C-I); and Campbell v. Paddington Corporation (1911), where a stand erected on the highway obstructed the plaintiff's view and profits, is a case of nuisance (D-IV). The matching is "(A) - (III), (B) - (II), (C) - (I), (D) - (IV)".

Practice for these exams

Related question papers

Related exam syllabi

Related questions in this topic