CLAT Exam  >  CLAT Questions  >  Paragraph:Notable for the reason that it is t... Start Learning for Free
Paragraph: Notable for the reason that it is the rare tort where intention is of relevance; the tort of malicious prosecution takes place where a person motivated by malice or ill feeling brings about a false and  frivolous case against another person in order to harass him by making him go through the rigours of litigation and court prosecution. There are certain ingredients of malicious prosecutionwhichare  essential if a suit is to be maintained and for it to ultimately succeed. Malice and an intention to frame the person is essential. It could be any ill-feeling, vengeance, jealousy or intention to cause hardship or defamation, but the element ofintention is a must or even the intention of framing someone else to save oneself is enough intention.
Where there is a genuine mistake, it will not be case of a malicious prosecution. In the case of Wyatt v White, the defendant discovered certain bags with the mark as his own and filed a charge of theft against the plaintiff in whose possession the bags were found. The plaintiff genuinely had a similar mark. The charge did not sustain, but the plaintiff sued the defendant for malicious prosecution. The court said itwas genuine mistake and as such the defendant was not motivated by malice, hence the suit did not succeed. However, a mere police complaint or institution of a case is not sufficient. It is important that the court process and prosecution must begin. In Ray v Bairagya, a criminal complaint was filed but was dismissed at inception. Since no proceeding had begun, the court did not recognise it to be a case of malicious prosecution.
Q. Which fact, if true, would have led the judges to decide the case of Wyatt v White differently?
  • a)
    The bags were kept together and hence it was very difficult to assign the bags to their owners.
  • b)
    Even though the bags had similar marks, the two bags contained very different things and on close examination of its contents the owners of the bags could have been distinguished.
  • c)
    As the bags were of different shapes and sizes, Wyatt knew that the bags are not his own when he filed the case against White.
  • d)
    A case of malicious prosecution requires an element of intent by the first party for the other person to be able to sue him.
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Most Upvoted Answer
Paragraph:Notable for the reason that it is the rare tort where intent...
Option D will not help d judges coz it is already said tht there was no malice...I think c is more better ans
Attention CLAT Students!
To make sure you are not studying endlessly, EduRev has designed CLAT study material, with Structured Courses, Videos, & Test Series. Plus get personalized analysis, doubt solving and improvement plans to achieve a great score in CLAT.
Explore Courses for CLAT exam

Similar CLAT Doubts

Paragraph:Notable for the reason that it is the rare tort where intention is of relevance; the tort of malicious prosecution takes place where a person motivated by malice or ill feeling brings about a false and frivolous case against another person in order to harass him by making him go through the rigours of litigation and court prosecution. There are certain ingredients of malicious prosecutionwhichare essential if a suit is to be maintained and for it to ultimately succeed. Malice and an intention to frame the person is essential. It could be any ill-feeling, vengeance, jealousy or intention to cause hardship or defamation, but the element ofintention is a must or even the intention of framing someone else to save oneself is enough intention.Where there is a genuine mistake, it will not be case of a malicious prosecution. In the case of Wyatt v White, the defendant discovered certain bags with the mark as his own and filed a charge of theft against the plaintiff in whose possession the bags were found. The plaintiff genuinely had a similar mark. The charge did not sustain, but the plaintiff sued the defendant for malicious prosecution. The court said itwas genuine mistake and as such the defendant was not motivated by malice, hence the suit did not succeed. However, a mere police complaint or institution of a case is not sufficient. It is important that the court process and prosecution must begin. In Ray v Bairagya, a criminal complaint was filed but was dismissed at inception. Since no proceeding had begun, the court did not recognise it to be a case of malicious prosecution.Q. Which of the following are not in consistency with the passage?

Paragraph:Notable for the reason that it is the rare tort where intention is of relevance; the tort of malicious prosecution takes place where a person motivated by malice or ill feeling brings about a false and frivolous case against another person in order to harass him by making him go through the rigours of litigation and court prosecution. There are certain ingredients of malicious prosecutionwhichare essential if a suit is to be maintained and for it to ultimately succeed. Malice and an intention to frame the person is essential. It could be any ill-feeling, vengeance, jealousy or intention to cause hardship or defamation, but the element ofintention is a must or even the intention of framing someone else to save oneself is enough intention.Where there is a genuine mistake, it will not be case of a malicious prosecution. In the case of Wyatt v White, the defendant discovered certain bags with the mark as his own and filed a charge of theft against the plaintiff in whose possession the bags were found. The plaintiff genuinely had a similar mark. The charge did not sustain, but the plaintiff sued the defendant for malicious prosecution. The court said itwas genuine mistake and as such the defendant was not motivated by malice, hence the suit did not succeed. However, a mere police complaint or institution of a case is not sufficient. It is important that the court process and prosecution must begin. In Ray v Bairagya, a criminal complaint was filed but was dismissed at inception. Since no proceeding had begun, the court did not recognise it to be a case of malicious prosecution.Q.Sanjeev and Rajeev were neighbours. They used to have a lot of arguments and wanted to harm eachother at the first opportunity that they got. One day, Sanjeev overheard Rajeev talking to his wife about how he would soon be stealing Sanjeevs car. Later that night, Sanjeevs car was stolen. Sanjeev immediately rushed to the police station and filed a complaint accusing Rajeev of having stolen the car. In a couple of hours, it was found out that Sanjeevs son had taken the car without informing him about the same. The police rejected Sanjeevs complaint. However, Rajeev wants to file a complaint of malicious prosecution against Sanjeev. Decide

Paragraph:Notable for the reason that it is the rare tort where intention is of relevance; the tort of malicious prosecution takes place where a person motivated by malice or ill feeling brings about a false and frivolous case against another person in order to harass him by making him go through the rigours of litigation and court prosecution. There are certain ingredients of malicious prosecutionwhichare essential if a suit is to be maintained and for it to ultimately succeed. Malice and an intention to frame the person is essential. It could be any ill-feeling, vengeance, jealousy or intention to cause hardship or defamation, but the element ofintention is a must or even the intention of framing someone else to save oneself is enough intention.Where there is a genuine mistake, it will not be case of a malicious prosecution. In the case of Wyatt v White, the defendant discovered certain bags with the mark as his own and filed a charge of theft against the plaintiff in whose possession the bags were found. The plaintiff genuinely had a similar mark. The charge did not sustain, but the plaintiff sued the defendant for malicious prosecution. The court said itwas genuine mistake and as such the defendant was not motivated by malice, hence the suit did not succeed. However, a mere police complaint or institution of a case is not sufficient. It is important that the court process and prosecution must begin. In Ray v Bairagya, a criminal complaint was filed but was dismissed at inception. Since no proceeding had begun, the court did not recognise it to be a case of malicious prosecution.Q.Sanjeev and Rajeev were neighbours. They used to have a lot of arguments and wanted to harm eachother at the first opportunity that they got. One day, Sanjeev overheard Rajeev talking to his wife about how he would soon be stealing Sanjeevs car. Later that night, Sanjeevs car was stolen. Sanjeev immediately rushed to the police station and filed a complaint accusing Rajeev of having stolen the car. In a couple of hours, it was found out that Sanjeevs son had taken the car without informing him about the same. The police rejected Sanjeevs complaint. However, Rajeev wants to file a complaint of malicious prosecution against Sanjeev. Decide

Paragraph:Notable for the reason that it is the rare tort where intention is of relevance; the tort of malicious prosecution takes place where a person motivated by malice or ill feeling brings about a false and frivolous case against another person in order to harass him by making him go through the rigours of litigation and court prosecution. There are certain ingredients of malicious prosecutionwhichare essential if a suit is to be maintained and for it to ultimately succeed. Malice and an intention to frame the person is essential. It could be any ill-feeling, vengeance, jealousy or intention to cause hardship or defamation, but the element ofintention is a must or even the intention of framing someone else to save oneself is enough intention.Where there is a genuine mistake, it will not be case of a malicious prosecution. In the case of Wyatt v White, the defendant discovered certain bags with the mark as his own and filed a charge of theft against the plaintiff in whose possession the bags were found. The plaintiff genuinely had a similar mark. The charge did not sustain, but the plaintiff sued the defendant for malicious prosecution. The court said itwas genuine mistake and as such the defendant was not motivated by malice, hence the suit did not succeed. However, a mere police complaint or institution of a case is not sufficient. It is important that the court process and prosecution must begin. In Ray v Bairagya, a criminal complaint was filed but was dismissed at inception. Since no proceeding had begun, the court did not recognise it to be a case of malicious prosecution.Q. Usher was sentenced to a jail term of 5 years in a case of treason. A year later, a report by the CBI cleared him of all charges and he was let out of the jail. That report also mentioned the fact that the judge had overlooked the report by mistake and had sentenced Usher to jail due to his negligence. Usher now files a case of malicious prosecution against the judge. Decide

Paragraph:Notable for the reason that it is the rare tort where intention is of relevance; the tort of malicious prosecution takes place where a person motivated by malice or ill feeling brings about a false and frivolous case against another person in order to harass him by making him go through the rigours of litigation and court prosecution. There are certain ingredients of malicious prosecutionwhichare essential if a suit is to be maintained and for it to ultimately succeed. Malice and an intention to frame the person is essential. It could be any ill-feeling, vengeance, jealousy or intention to cause hardship or defamation, but the element ofintention is a must or even the intention of framing someone else to save oneself is enough intention.Where there is a genuine mistake, it will not be case of a malicious prosecution. In the case of Wyatt v White, the defendant discovered certain bags with the mark as his own and filed a charge of theft against the plaintiff in whose possession the bags were found. The plaintiff genuinely had a similar mark. The charge did not sustain, but the plaintiff sued the defendant for malicious prosecution. The court said itwas genuine mistake and as such the defendant was not motivated by malice, hence the suit did not succeed. However, a mere police complaint or institution of a case is not sufficient. It is important that the court process and prosecution must begin. In Ray v Bairagya, a criminal complaint was filed but was dismissed at inception. Since no proceeding had begun, the court did not recognise it to be a case of malicious prosecution.Q. Sanjay had hired Suneel for working in his law firm. All was well for the first eight months. After that, Suneel started being irregular to work. On being confronted by Sanjay, Suneel flipped and started shouting at Sanjay. Later on, he quit the job and was sued by Sanjay for the breach of the contract of employment. Suneel, in turn, while the proceeding in the earlier suit were ongoing, filed a case of malicious prosecution against Sanjay. Decide

Top Courses for CLAT

Paragraph:Notable for the reason that it is the rare tort where intention is of relevance; the tort of malicious prosecution takes place where a person motivated by malice or ill feeling brings about a false and frivolous case against another person in order to harass him by making him go through the rigours of litigation and court prosecution. There are certain ingredients of malicious prosecutionwhichare essential if a suit is to be maintained and for it to ultimately succeed. Malice and an intention to frame the person is essential. It could be any ill-feeling, vengeance, jealousy or intention to cause hardship or defamation, but the element ofintention is a must or even the intention of framing someone else to save oneself is enough intention.Where there is a genuine mistake, it will not be case of a malicious prosecution. In the case of Wyatt v White, the defendant discovered certain bags with the mark as his own and filed a charge of theft against the plaintiff in whose possession the bags were found. The plaintiff genuinely had a similar mark. The charge did not sustain, but the plaintiff sued the defendant for malicious prosecution. The court said itwas genuine mistake and as such the defendant was not motivated by malice, hence the suit did not succeed. However, a mere police complaint or institution of a case is not sufficient. It is important that the court process and prosecution must begin. In Ray v Bairagya, a criminal complaint was filed but was dismissed at inception. Since no proceeding had begun, the court did not recognise it to be a case of malicious prosecution.Q. Which fact, if true, would have led the judges to decide the case of Wyatt v White differently?a)The bags were kept together and hence it was very difficult to assign the bags to their owners.b)Even though the bags had similar marks, the two bags contained very different things and on close examination of its contents the owners of the bags could have been distinguished.c)As the bags were of different shapes and sizes, Wyatt knew that the bags are not his own when he filed the case against White.d)A case of malicious prosecution requires an element of intent by the first party for the other person to be able to sue him.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Question Description
Paragraph:Notable for the reason that it is the rare tort where intention is of relevance; the tort of malicious prosecution takes place where a person motivated by malice or ill feeling brings about a false and frivolous case against another person in order to harass him by making him go through the rigours of litigation and court prosecution. There are certain ingredients of malicious prosecutionwhichare essential if a suit is to be maintained and for it to ultimately succeed. Malice and an intention to frame the person is essential. It could be any ill-feeling, vengeance, jealousy or intention to cause hardship or defamation, but the element ofintention is a must or even the intention of framing someone else to save oneself is enough intention.Where there is a genuine mistake, it will not be case of a malicious prosecution. In the case of Wyatt v White, the defendant discovered certain bags with the mark as his own and filed a charge of theft against the plaintiff in whose possession the bags were found. The plaintiff genuinely had a similar mark. The charge did not sustain, but the plaintiff sued the defendant for malicious prosecution. The court said itwas genuine mistake and as such the defendant was not motivated by malice, hence the suit did not succeed. However, a mere police complaint or institution of a case is not sufficient. It is important that the court process and prosecution must begin. In Ray v Bairagya, a criminal complaint was filed but was dismissed at inception. Since no proceeding had begun, the court did not recognise it to be a case of malicious prosecution.Q. Which fact, if true, would have led the judges to decide the case of Wyatt v White differently?a)The bags were kept together and hence it was very difficult to assign the bags to their owners.b)Even though the bags had similar marks, the two bags contained very different things and on close examination of its contents the owners of the bags could have been distinguished.c)As the bags were of different shapes and sizes, Wyatt knew that the bags are not his own when he filed the case against White.d)A case of malicious prosecution requires an element of intent by the first party for the other person to be able to sue him.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 Paragraph:Notable for the reason that it is the rare tort where intention is of relevance; the tort of malicious prosecution takes place where a person motivated by malice or ill feeling brings about a false and frivolous case against another person in order to harass him by making him go through the rigours of litigation and court prosecution. There are certain ingredients of malicious prosecutionwhichare essential if a suit is to be maintained and for it to ultimately succeed. Malice and an intention to frame the person is essential. It could be any ill-feeling, vengeance, jealousy or intention to cause hardship or defamation, but the element ofintention is a must or even the intention of framing someone else to save oneself is enough intention.Where there is a genuine mistake, it will not be case of a malicious prosecution. In the case of Wyatt v White, the defendant discovered certain bags with the mark as his own and filed a charge of theft against the plaintiff in whose possession the bags were found. The plaintiff genuinely had a similar mark. The charge did not sustain, but the plaintiff sued the defendant for malicious prosecution. The court said itwas genuine mistake and as such the defendant was not motivated by malice, hence the suit did not succeed. However, a mere police complaint or institution of a case is not sufficient. It is important that the court process and prosecution must begin. In Ray v Bairagya, a criminal complaint was filed but was dismissed at inception. Since no proceeding had begun, the court did not recognise it to be a case of malicious prosecution.Q. Which fact, if true, would have led the judges to decide the case of Wyatt v White differently?a)The bags were kept together and hence it was very difficult to assign the bags to their owners.b)Even though the bags had similar marks, the two bags contained very different things and on close examination of its contents the owners of the bags could have been distinguished.c)As the bags were of different shapes and sizes, Wyatt knew that the bags are not his own when he filed the case against White.d)A case of malicious prosecution requires an element of intent by the first party for the other person to be able to sue him.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 Paragraph:Notable for the reason that it is the rare tort where intention is of relevance; the tort of malicious prosecution takes place where a person motivated by malice or ill feeling brings about a false and frivolous case against another person in order to harass him by making him go through the rigours of litigation and court prosecution. There are certain ingredients of malicious prosecutionwhichare essential if a suit is to be maintained and for it to ultimately succeed. Malice and an intention to frame the person is essential. It could be any ill-feeling, vengeance, jealousy or intention to cause hardship or defamation, but the element ofintention is a must or even the intention of framing someone else to save oneself is enough intention.Where there is a genuine mistake, it will not be case of a malicious prosecution. In the case of Wyatt v White, the defendant discovered certain bags with the mark as his own and filed a charge of theft against the plaintiff in whose possession the bags were found. The plaintiff genuinely had a similar mark. The charge did not sustain, but the plaintiff sued the defendant for malicious prosecution. The court said itwas genuine mistake and as such the defendant was not motivated by malice, hence the suit did not succeed. However, a mere police complaint or institution of a case is not sufficient. It is important that the court process and prosecution must begin. In Ray v Bairagya, a criminal complaint was filed but was dismissed at inception. Since no proceeding had begun, the court did not recognise it to be a case of malicious prosecution.Q. Which fact, if true, would have led the judges to decide the case of Wyatt v White differently?a)The bags were kept together and hence it was very difficult to assign the bags to their owners.b)Even though the bags had similar marks, the two bags contained very different things and on close examination of its contents the owners of the bags could have been distinguished.c)As the bags were of different shapes and sizes, Wyatt knew that the bags are not his own when he filed the case against White.d)A case of malicious prosecution requires an element of intent by the first party for the other person to be able to sue him.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?.
Solutions for Paragraph:Notable for the reason that it is the rare tort where intention is of relevance; the tort of malicious prosecution takes place where a person motivated by malice or ill feeling brings about a false and frivolous case against another person in order to harass him by making him go through the rigours of litigation and court prosecution. There are certain ingredients of malicious prosecutionwhichare essential if a suit is to be maintained and for it to ultimately succeed. Malice and an intention to frame the person is essential. It could be any ill-feeling, vengeance, jealousy or intention to cause hardship or defamation, but the element ofintention is a must or even the intention of framing someone else to save oneself is enough intention.Where there is a genuine mistake, it will not be case of a malicious prosecution. In the case of Wyatt v White, the defendant discovered certain bags with the mark as his own and filed a charge of theft against the plaintiff in whose possession the bags were found. The plaintiff genuinely had a similar mark. The charge did not sustain, but the plaintiff sued the defendant for malicious prosecution. The court said itwas genuine mistake and as such the defendant was not motivated by malice, hence the suit did not succeed. However, a mere police complaint or institution of a case is not sufficient. It is important that the court process and prosecution must begin. In Ray v Bairagya, a criminal complaint was filed but was dismissed at inception. Since no proceeding had begun, the court did not recognise it to be a case of malicious prosecution.Q. Which fact, if true, would have led the judges to decide the case of Wyatt v White differently?a)The bags were kept together and hence it was very difficult to assign the bags to their owners.b)Even though the bags had similar marks, the two bags contained very different things and on close examination of its contents the owners of the bags could have been distinguished.c)As the bags were of different shapes and sizes, Wyatt knew that the bags are not his own when he filed the case against White.d)A case of malicious prosecution requires an element of intent by the first party for the other person to be able to sue him.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 Paragraph:Notable for the reason that it is the rare tort where intention is of relevance; the tort of malicious prosecution takes place where a person motivated by malice or ill feeling brings about a false and frivolous case against another person in order to harass him by making him go through the rigours of litigation and court prosecution. There are certain ingredients of malicious prosecutionwhichare essential if a suit is to be maintained and for it to ultimately succeed. Malice and an intention to frame the person is essential. It could be any ill-feeling, vengeance, jealousy or intention to cause hardship or defamation, but the element ofintention is a must or even the intention of framing someone else to save oneself is enough intention.Where there is a genuine mistake, it will not be case of a malicious prosecution. In the case of Wyatt v White, the defendant discovered certain bags with the mark as his own and filed a charge of theft against the plaintiff in whose possession the bags were found. The plaintiff genuinely had a similar mark. The charge did not sustain, but the plaintiff sued the defendant for malicious prosecution. The court said itwas genuine mistake and as such the defendant was not motivated by malice, hence the suit did not succeed. However, a mere police complaint or institution of a case is not sufficient. It is important that the court process and prosecution must begin. In Ray v Bairagya, a criminal complaint was filed but was dismissed at inception. Since no proceeding had begun, the court did not recognise it to be a case of malicious prosecution.Q. Which fact, if true, would have led the judges to decide the case of Wyatt v White differently?a)The bags were kept together and hence it was very difficult to assign the bags to their owners.b)Even though the bags had similar marks, the two bags contained very different things and on close examination of its contents the owners of the bags could have been distinguished.c)As the bags were of different shapes and sizes, Wyatt knew that the bags are not his own when he filed the case against White.d)A case of malicious prosecution requires an element of intent by the first party for the other person to be able to sue him.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Paragraph:Notable for the reason that it is the rare tort where intention is of relevance; the tort of malicious prosecution takes place where a person motivated by malice or ill feeling brings about a false and frivolous case against another person in order to harass him by making him go through the rigours of litigation and court prosecution. There are certain ingredients of malicious prosecutionwhichare essential if a suit is to be maintained and for it to ultimately succeed. Malice and an intention to frame the person is essential. It could be any ill-feeling, vengeance, jealousy or intention to cause hardship or defamation, but the element ofintention is a must or even the intention of framing someone else to save oneself is enough intention.Where there is a genuine mistake, it will not be case of a malicious prosecution. In the case of Wyatt v White, the defendant discovered certain bags with the mark as his own and filed a charge of theft against the plaintiff in whose possession the bags were found. The plaintiff genuinely had a similar mark. The charge did not sustain, but the plaintiff sued the defendant for malicious prosecution. The court said itwas genuine mistake and as such the defendant was not motivated by malice, hence the suit did not succeed. However, a mere police complaint or institution of a case is not sufficient. It is important that the court process and prosecution must begin. In Ray v Bairagya, a criminal complaint was filed but was dismissed at inception. Since no proceeding had begun, the court did not recognise it to be a case of malicious prosecution.Q. Which fact, if true, would have led the judges to decide the case of Wyatt v White differently?a)The bags were kept together and hence it was very difficult to assign the bags to their owners.b)Even though the bags had similar marks, the two bags contained very different things and on close examination of its contents the owners of the bags could have been distinguished.c)As the bags were of different shapes and sizes, Wyatt knew that the bags are not his own when he filed the case against White.d)A case of malicious prosecution requires an element of intent by the first party for the other person to be able to sue him.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Paragraph:Notable for the reason that it is the rare tort where intention is of relevance; the tort of malicious prosecution takes place where a person motivated by malice or ill feeling brings about a false and frivolous case against another person in order to harass him by making him go through the rigours of litigation and court prosecution. There are certain ingredients of malicious prosecutionwhichare essential if a suit is to be maintained and for it to ultimately succeed. Malice and an intention to frame the person is essential. It could be any ill-feeling, vengeance, jealousy or intention to cause hardship or defamation, but the element ofintention is a must or even the intention of framing someone else to save oneself is enough intention.Where there is a genuine mistake, it will not be case of a malicious prosecution. In the case of Wyatt v White, the defendant discovered certain bags with the mark as his own and filed a charge of theft against the plaintiff in whose possession the bags were found. The plaintiff genuinely had a similar mark. The charge did not sustain, but the plaintiff sued the defendant for malicious prosecution. The court said itwas genuine mistake and as such the defendant was not motivated by malice, hence the suit did not succeed. However, a mere police complaint or institution of a case is not sufficient. It is important that the court process and prosecution must begin. In Ray v Bairagya, a criminal complaint was filed but was dismissed at inception. Since no proceeding had begun, the court did not recognise it to be a case of malicious prosecution.Q. Which fact, if true, would have led the judges to decide the case of Wyatt v White differently?a)The bags were kept together and hence it was very difficult to assign the bags to their owners.b)Even though the bags had similar marks, the two bags contained very different things and on close examination of its contents the owners of the bags could have been distinguished.c)As the bags were of different shapes and sizes, Wyatt knew that the bags are not his own when he filed the case against White.d)A case of malicious prosecution requires an element of intent by the first party for the other person to be able to sue him.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Paragraph:Notable for the reason that it is the rare tort where intention is of relevance; the tort of malicious prosecution takes place where a person motivated by malice or ill feeling brings about a false and frivolous case against another person in order to harass him by making him go through the rigours of litigation and court prosecution. There are certain ingredients of malicious prosecutionwhichare essential if a suit is to be maintained and for it to ultimately succeed. Malice and an intention to frame the person is essential. It could be any ill-feeling, vengeance, jealousy or intention to cause hardship or defamation, but the element ofintention is a must or even the intention of framing someone else to save oneself is enough intention.Where there is a genuine mistake, it will not be case of a malicious prosecution. In the case of Wyatt v White, the defendant discovered certain bags with the mark as his own and filed a charge of theft against the plaintiff in whose possession the bags were found. The plaintiff genuinely had a similar mark. The charge did not sustain, but the plaintiff sued the defendant for malicious prosecution. The court said itwas genuine mistake and as such the defendant was not motivated by malice, hence the suit did not succeed. However, a mere police complaint or institution of a case is not sufficient. It is important that the court process and prosecution must begin. In Ray v Bairagya, a criminal complaint was filed but was dismissed at inception. Since no proceeding had begun, the court did not recognise it to be a case of malicious prosecution.Q. Which fact, if true, would have led the judges to decide the case of Wyatt v White differently?a)The bags were kept together and hence it was very difficult to assign the bags to their owners.b)Even though the bags had similar marks, the two bags contained very different things and on close examination of its contents the owners of the bags could have been distinguished.c)As the bags were of different shapes and sizes, Wyatt knew that the bags are not his own when he filed the case against White.d)A case of malicious prosecution requires an element of intent by the first party for the other person to be able to sue him.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Paragraph:Notable for the reason that it is the rare tort where intention is of relevance; the tort of malicious prosecution takes place where a person motivated by malice or ill feeling brings about a false and frivolous case against another person in order to harass him by making him go through the rigours of litigation and court prosecution. There are certain ingredients of malicious prosecutionwhichare essential if a suit is to be maintained and for it to ultimately succeed. Malice and an intention to frame the person is essential. It could be any ill-feeling, vengeance, jealousy or intention to cause hardship or defamation, but the element ofintention is a must or even the intention of framing someone else to save oneself is enough intention.Where there is a genuine mistake, it will not be case of a malicious prosecution. In the case of Wyatt v White, the defendant discovered certain bags with the mark as his own and filed a charge of theft against the plaintiff in whose possession the bags were found. The plaintiff genuinely had a similar mark. The charge did not sustain, but the plaintiff sued the defendant for malicious prosecution. The court said itwas genuine mistake and as such the defendant was not motivated by malice, hence the suit did not succeed. However, a mere police complaint or institution of a case is not sufficient. It is important that the court process and prosecution must begin. In Ray v Bairagya, a criminal complaint was filed but was dismissed at inception. Since no proceeding had begun, the court did not recognise it to be a case of malicious prosecution.Q. Which fact, if true, would have led the judges to decide the case of Wyatt v White differently?a)The bags were kept together and hence it was very difficult to assign the bags to their owners.b)Even though the bags had similar marks, the two bags contained very different things and on close examination of its contents the owners of the bags could have been distinguished.c)As the bags were of different shapes and sizes, Wyatt knew that the bags are not his own when he filed the case against White.d)A case of malicious prosecution requires an element of intent by the first party for the other person to be able to sue him.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.
Explore Courses for CLAT exam

Top Courses for CLAT

Explore Courses
Signup for Free!
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days! Learn & Practice with 1000+ FREE Notes, Videos & Tests.
10M+ students study on EduRev