Question Description
Principle 1 – The Principal is liable for all acts of the agent done in the course of employment.Principle 2 – When a servant commits a mistake while acting on behalf of his master, causing loss to the plaintiff thereby, the master will be liable for the same.Principle 3 – Generally, the employer is not liable for torts committed by an independent contractor working for him.Exception – The employer will be held liable for the acts of an independent contractor if he authorizes the doing of an illegal act.Explanation – An independent contractor is one who is not under the complete direction and control of the employer.Principle 4 – If the servant acts negligently in the performance of his duties or displays reckless behaviour, thereby causing loss to the plaintiff, the master will be held liable.Principle 5 – If the servant does an act in defiance of an express prohibition, and the act is outside the course of employment, then the master cannot be held liable for harm arising out of such an act.Facts – Fast Carz is a company that providescars for rented use in the city of New Heights.A University in the city was organising aLiterary Festival, and had to pick up and dropoff eminent guests from the airport, and hadhired a car from Zoom Carz for a period of twodays. The Company had put up two noticeson each of its cars. One of them read that nounauthorized person was allowed to take a liftin the car. The other read that the driver hadbeen told expressly, not to give lifts tounauthorized people. He was only authorizedto pick up and drop off persons as instructedby the University. On his way to the airport topick up Amit Nayar, a famous author, thedriver sees a friend on the sidewalk anddecides to give him a lift. While driving on thehighway to the airport, the driver caused anaccident due to rash and negligent driving,and the friend sustained a head injury andwas paralysed for life. Who is to be heldliable?a)The driver ought to be held liable, as it is hisfault alone.b)The Company must be held liable, as it was anegligent act of the driver, in the course ofemployment.c)The University should probably be held liablefor not giving him instructions that were clearenough.d)The driver’s act was in defiance of expressorders of the Company. Hence, the Companycannot be held liable, and the driver will beliable for his act.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? for CLAT 2024 is part of CLAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CLAT exam syllabus. Information about Principle 1 – The Principal is liable for all acts of the agent done in the course of employment.Principle 2 – When a servant commits a mistake while acting on behalf of his master, causing loss to the plaintiff thereby, the master will be liable for the same.Principle 3 – Generally, the employer is not liable for torts committed by an independent contractor working for him.Exception – The employer will be held liable for the acts of an independent contractor if he authorizes the doing of an illegal act.Explanation – An independent contractor is one who is not under the complete direction and control of the employer.Principle 4 – If the servant acts negligently in the performance of his duties or displays reckless behaviour, thereby causing loss to the plaintiff, the master will be held liable.Principle 5 – If the servant does an act in defiance of an express prohibition, and the act is outside the course of employment, then the master cannot be held liable for harm arising out of such an act.Facts – Fast Carz is a company that providescars for rented use in the city of New Heights.A University in the city was organising aLiterary Festival, and had to pick up and dropoff eminent guests from the airport, and hadhired a car from Zoom Carz for a period of twodays. The Company had put up two noticeson each of its cars. One of them read that nounauthorized person was allowed to take a liftin the car. The other read that the driver hadbeen told expressly, not to give lifts tounauthorized people. He was only authorizedto pick up and drop off persons as instructedby the University. On his way to the airport topick up Amit Nayar, a famous author, thedriver sees a friend on the sidewalk anddecides to give him a lift. While driving on thehighway to the airport, the driver caused anaccident due to rash and negligent driving,and the friend sustained a head injury andwas paralysed for life. Who is to be heldliable?a)The driver ought to be held liable, as it is hisfault alone.b)The Company must be held liable, as it was anegligent act of the driver, in the course ofemployment.c)The University should probably be held liablefor not giving him instructions that were clearenough.d)The driver’s act was in defiance of expressorders of the Company. Hence, the Companycannot be held liable, and the driver will beliable for his act.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CLAT 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Principle 1 – The Principal is liable for all acts of the agent done in the course of employment.Principle 2 – When a servant commits a mistake while acting on behalf of his master, causing loss to the plaintiff thereby, the master will be liable for the same.Principle 3 – Generally, the employer is not liable for torts committed by an independent contractor working for him.Exception – The employer will be held liable for the acts of an independent contractor if he authorizes the doing of an illegal act.Explanation – An independent contractor is one who is not under the complete direction and control of the employer.Principle 4 – If the servant acts negligently in the performance of his duties or displays reckless behaviour, thereby causing loss to the plaintiff, the master will be held liable.Principle 5 – If the servant does an act in defiance of an express prohibition, and the act is outside the course of employment, then the master cannot be held liable for harm arising out of such an act.Facts – Fast Carz is a company that providescars for rented use in the city of New Heights.A University in the city was organising aLiterary Festival, and had to pick up and dropoff eminent guests from the airport, and hadhired a car from Zoom Carz for a period of twodays. The Company had put up two noticeson each of its cars. One of them read that nounauthorized person was allowed to take a liftin the car. The other read that the driver hadbeen told expressly, not to give lifts tounauthorized people. He was only authorizedto pick up and drop off persons as instructedby the University. On his way to the airport topick up Amit Nayar, a famous author, thedriver sees a friend on the sidewalk anddecides to give him a lift. While driving on thehighway to the airport, the driver caused anaccident due to rash and negligent driving,and the friend sustained a head injury andwas paralysed for life. Who is to be heldliable?a)The driver ought to be held liable, as it is hisfault alone.b)The Company must be held liable, as it was anegligent act of the driver, in the course ofemployment.c)The University should probably be held liablefor not giving him instructions that were clearenough.d)The driver’s act was in defiance of expressorders of the Company. Hence, the Companycannot be held liable, and the driver will beliable for his act.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for Principle 1 – The Principal is liable for all acts of the agent done in the course of employment.Principle 2 – When a servant commits a mistake while acting on behalf of his master, causing loss to the plaintiff thereby, the master will be liable for the same.Principle 3 – Generally, the employer is not liable for torts committed by an independent contractor working for him.Exception – The employer will be held liable for the acts of an independent contractor if he authorizes the doing of an illegal act.Explanation – An independent contractor is one who is not under the complete direction and control of the employer.Principle 4 – If the servant acts negligently in the performance of his duties or displays reckless behaviour, thereby causing loss to the plaintiff, the master will be held liable.Principle 5 – If the servant does an act in defiance of an express prohibition, and the act is outside the course of employment, then the master cannot be held liable for harm arising out of such an act.Facts – Fast Carz is a company that providescars for rented use in the city of New Heights.A University in the city was organising aLiterary Festival, and had to pick up and dropoff eminent guests from the airport, and hadhired a car from Zoom Carz for a period of twodays. The Company had put up two noticeson each of its cars. One of them read that nounauthorized person was allowed to take a liftin the car. The other read that the driver hadbeen told expressly, not to give lifts tounauthorized people. He was only authorizedto pick up and drop off persons as instructedby the University. On his way to the airport topick up Amit Nayar, a famous author, thedriver sees a friend on the sidewalk anddecides to give him a lift. While driving on thehighway to the airport, the driver caused anaccident due to rash and negligent driving,and the friend sustained a head injury andwas paralysed for life. Who is to be heldliable?a)The driver ought to be held liable, as it is hisfault alone.b)The Company must be held liable, as it was anegligent act of the driver, in the course ofemployment.c)The University should probably be held liablefor not giving him instructions that were clearenough.d)The driver’s act was in defiance of expressorders of the Company. Hence, the Companycannot be held liable, and the driver will beliable for his act.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for CLAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CLAT Exam by signing up for free.

Here you can find the meaning of Principle 1 – The Principal is liable for all acts of the agent done in the course of employment.Principle 2 – When a servant commits a mistake while acting on behalf of his master, causing loss to the plaintiff thereby, the master will be liable for the same.Principle 3 – Generally, the employer is not liable for torts committed by an independent contractor working for him.Exception – The employer will be held liable for the acts of an independent contractor if he authorizes the doing of an illegal act.Explanation – An independent contractor is one who is not under the complete direction and control of the employer.Principle 4 – If the servant acts negligently in the performance of his duties or displays reckless behaviour, thereby causing loss to the plaintiff, the master will be held liable.Principle 5 – If the servant does an act in defiance of an express prohibition, and the act is outside the course of employment, then the master cannot be held liable for harm arising out of such an act.Facts – Fast Carz is a company that providescars for rented use in the city of New Heights.A University in the city was organising aLiterary Festival, and had to pick up and dropoff eminent guests from the airport, and hadhired a car from Zoom Carz for a period of twodays. The Company had put up two noticeson each of its cars. One of them read that nounauthorized person was allowed to take a liftin the car. The other read that the driver hadbeen told expressly, not to give lifts tounauthorized people. He was only authorizedto pick up and drop off persons as instructedby the University. On his way to the airport topick up Amit Nayar, a famous author, thedriver sees a friend on the sidewalk anddecides to give him a lift. While driving on thehighway to the airport, the driver caused anaccident due to rash and negligent driving,and the friend sustained a head injury andwas paralysed for life. Who is to be heldliable?a)The driver ought to be held liable, as it is hisfault alone.b)The Company must be held liable, as it was anegligent act of the driver, in the course ofemployment.c)The University should probably be held liablefor not giving him instructions that were clearenough.d)The driver’s act was in defiance of expressorders of the Company. Hence, the Companycannot be held liable, and the driver will beliable for his act.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Principle 1 – The Principal is liable for all acts of the agent done in the course of employment.Principle 2 – When a servant commits a mistake while acting on behalf of his master, causing loss to the plaintiff thereby, the master will be liable for the same.Principle 3 – Generally, the employer is not liable for torts committed by an independent contractor working for him.Exception – The employer will be held liable for the acts of an independent contractor if he authorizes the doing of an illegal act.Explanation – An independent contractor is one who is not under the complete direction and control of the employer.Principle 4 – If the servant acts negligently in the performance of his duties or displays reckless behaviour, thereby causing loss to the plaintiff, the master will be held liable.Principle 5 – If the servant does an act in defiance of an express prohibition, and the act is outside the course of employment, then the master cannot be held liable for harm arising out of such an act.Facts – Fast Carz is a company that providescars for rented use in the city of New Heights.A University in the city was organising aLiterary Festival, and had to pick up and dropoff eminent guests from the airport, and hadhired a car from Zoom Carz for a period of twodays. The Company had put up two noticeson each of its cars. One of them read that nounauthorized person was allowed to take a liftin the car. The other read that the driver hadbeen told expressly, not to give lifts tounauthorized people. He was only authorizedto pick up and drop off persons as instructedby the University. On his way to the airport topick up Amit Nayar, a famous author, thedriver sees a friend on the sidewalk anddecides to give him a lift. While driving on thehighway to the airport, the driver caused anaccident due to rash and negligent driving,and the friend sustained a head injury andwas paralysed for life. Who is to be heldliable?a)The driver ought to be held liable, as it is hisfault alone.b)The Company must be held liable, as it was anegligent act of the driver, in the course ofemployment.c)The University should probably be held liablefor not giving him instructions that were clearenough.d)The driver’s act was in defiance of expressorders of the Company. Hence, the Companycannot be held liable, and the driver will beliable for his act.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Principle 1 – The Principal is liable for all acts of the agent done in the course of employment.Principle 2 – When a servant commits a mistake while acting on behalf of his master, causing loss to the plaintiff thereby, the master will be liable for the same.Principle 3 – Generally, the employer is not liable for torts committed by an independent contractor working for him.Exception – The employer will be held liable for the acts of an independent contractor if he authorizes the doing of an illegal act.Explanation – An independent contractor is one who is not under the complete direction and control of the employer.Principle 4 – If the servant acts negligently in the performance of his duties or displays reckless behaviour, thereby causing loss to the plaintiff, the master will be held liable.Principle 5 – If the servant does an act in defiance of an express prohibition, and the act is outside the course of employment, then the master cannot be held liable for harm arising out of such an act.Facts – Fast Carz is a company that providescars for rented use in the city of New Heights.A University in the city was organising aLiterary Festival, and had to pick up and dropoff eminent guests from the airport, and hadhired a car from Zoom Carz for a period of twodays. The Company had put up two noticeson each of its cars. One of them read that nounauthorized person was allowed to take a liftin the car. The other read that the driver hadbeen told expressly, not to give lifts tounauthorized people. He was only authorizedto pick up and drop off persons as instructedby the University. On his way to the airport topick up Amit Nayar, a famous author, thedriver sees a friend on the sidewalk anddecides to give him a lift. While driving on thehighway to the airport, the driver caused anaccident due to rash and negligent driving,and the friend sustained a head injury andwas paralysed for life. Who is to be heldliable?a)The driver ought to be held liable, as it is hisfault alone.b)The Company must be held liable, as it was anegligent act of the driver, in the course ofemployment.c)The University should probably be held liablefor not giving him instructions that were clearenough.d)The driver’s act was in defiance of expressorders of the Company. Hence, the Companycannot be held liable, and the driver will beliable for his act.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Principle 1 – The Principal is liable for all acts of the agent done in the course of employment.Principle 2 – When a servant commits a mistake while acting on behalf of his master, causing loss to the plaintiff thereby, the master will be liable for the same.Principle 3 – Generally, the employer is not liable for torts committed by an independent contractor working for him.Exception – The employer will be held liable for the acts of an independent contractor if he authorizes the doing of an illegal act.Explanation – An independent contractor is one who is not under the complete direction and control of the employer.Principle 4 – If the servant acts negligently in the performance of his duties or displays reckless behaviour, thereby causing loss to the plaintiff, the master will be held liable.Principle 5 – If the servant does an act in defiance of an express prohibition, and the act is outside the course of employment, then the master cannot be held liable for harm arising out of such an act.Facts – Fast Carz is a company that providescars for rented use in the city of New Heights.A University in the city was organising aLiterary Festival, and had to pick up and dropoff eminent guests from the airport, and hadhired a car from Zoom Carz for a period of twodays. The Company had put up two noticeson each of its cars. One of them read that nounauthorized person was allowed to take a liftin the car. The other read that the driver hadbeen told expressly, not to give lifts tounauthorized people. He was only authorizedto pick up and drop off persons as instructedby the University. On his way to the airport topick up Amit Nayar, a famous author, thedriver sees a friend on the sidewalk anddecides to give him a lift. While driving on thehighway to the airport, the driver caused anaccident due to rash and negligent driving,and the friend sustained a head injury andwas paralysed for life. Who is to be heldliable?a)The driver ought to be held liable, as it is hisfault alone.b)The Company must be held liable, as it was anegligent act of the driver, in the course ofemployment.c)The University should probably be held liablefor not giving him instructions that were clearenough.d)The driver’s act was in defiance of expressorders of the Company. Hence, the Companycannot be held liable, and the driver will beliable for his act.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Principle 1 – The Principal is liable for all acts of the agent done in the course of employment.Principle 2 – When a servant commits a mistake while acting on behalf of his master, causing loss to the plaintiff thereby, the master will be liable for the same.Principle 3 – Generally, the employer is not liable for torts committed by an independent contractor working for him.Exception – The employer will be held liable for the acts of an independent contractor if he authorizes the doing of an illegal act.Explanation – An independent contractor is one who is not under the complete direction and control of the employer.Principle 4 – If the servant acts negligently in the performance of his duties or displays reckless behaviour, thereby causing loss to the plaintiff, the master will be held liable.Principle 5 – If the servant does an act in defiance of an express prohibition, and the act is outside the course of employment, then the master cannot be held liable for harm arising out of such an act.Facts – Fast Carz is a company that providescars for rented use in the city of New Heights.A University in the city was organising aLiterary Festival, and had to pick up and dropoff eminent guests from the airport, and hadhired a car from Zoom Carz for a period of twodays. The Company had put up two noticeson each of its cars. One of them read that nounauthorized person was allowed to take a liftin the car. The other read that the driver hadbeen told expressly, not to give lifts tounauthorized people. He was only authorizedto pick up and drop off persons as instructedby the University. On his way to the airport topick up Amit Nayar, a famous author, thedriver sees a friend on the sidewalk anddecides to give him a lift. While driving on thehighway to the airport, the driver caused anaccident due to rash and negligent driving,and the friend sustained a head injury andwas paralysed for life. Who is to be heldliable?a)The driver ought to be held liable, as it is hisfault alone.b)The Company must be held liable, as it was anegligent act of the driver, in the course ofemployment.c)The University should probably be held liablefor not giving him instructions that were clearenough.d)The driver’s act was in defiance of expressorders of the Company. Hence, the Companycannot be held liable, and the driver will beliable for his act.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.