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 provides cars for rented use in the city of New Heights. A University in the city was organising a Literary Festival, and had to pick up and drop off eminent guests from the airport, and had hired a car from Zoom Carz for a period of two days. The Company had put up two notices on each of its cars. One of them read that no unauthorized person was allowed to take a lift in the car. The other read that the driver had been told expressly, not to give lifts to unauthorized people. He was only authorized to pick up and drop off persons as instructed by the University. On his way to the airport to pick up Amit Nayar, a famous author, the driver sees a friend on the sidewalk and decides to give him a lift. While driving on the highway to the airport, the driver caused an accident due to rash and negligent driving, and thefriend sustained a head injury and was paralysed for life. Who is to be held liable?a)The driver ought to be held liable, as it is his fault alone.b)The Company must be held liable, as it was a negligent act of the driver, in the course of employment.c)The University should probably be held liable for not giving him instructions that were clear enough.d)The driver’s act was in defiance of express orders of the Company. Hence, the Company cannot be held liable, and the driver will be liable 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 provides cars for rented use in the city of New Heights. A University in the city was organising a Literary Festival, and had to pick up and drop off eminent guests from the airport, and had hired a car from Zoom Carz for a period of two days. The Company had put up two notices on each of its cars. One of them read that no unauthorized person was allowed to take a lift in the car. The other read that the driver had been told expressly, not to give lifts to unauthorized people. He was only authorized to pick up and drop off persons as instructed by the University. On his way to the airport to pick up Amit Nayar, a famous author, the driver sees a friend on the sidewalk and decides to give him a lift. While driving on the highway to the airport, the driver caused an accident due to rash and negligent driving, and thefriend sustained a head injury and was paralysed for life. Who is to be held liable?a)The driver ought to be held liable, as it is his fault alone.b)The Company must be held liable, as it was a negligent act of the driver, in the course of employment.c)The University should probably be held liable for not giving him instructions that were clear enough.d)The driver’s act was in defiance of express orders of the Company. Hence, the Company cannot be held liable, and the driver will be liable 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 provides cars for rented use in the city of New Heights. A University in the city was organising a Literary Festival, and had to pick up and drop off eminent guests from the airport, and had hired a car from Zoom Carz for a period of two days. The Company had put up two notices on each of its cars. One of them read that no unauthorized person was allowed to take a lift in the car. The other read that the driver had been told expressly, not to give lifts to unauthorized people. He was only authorized to pick up and drop off persons as instructed by the University. On his way to the airport to pick up Amit Nayar, a famous author, the driver sees a friend on the sidewalk and decides to give him a lift. While driving on the highway to the airport, the driver caused an accident due to rash and negligent driving, and thefriend sustained a head injury and was paralysed for life. Who is to be held liable?a)The driver ought to be held liable, as it is his fault alone.b)The Company must be held liable, as it was a negligent act of the driver, in the course of employment.c)The University should probably be held liable for not giving him instructions that were clear enough.d)The driver’s act was in defiance of express orders of the Company. Hence, the Company cannot be held liable, and the driver will be liable 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 provides cars for rented use in the city of New Heights. A University in the city was organising a Literary Festival, and had to pick up and drop off eminent guests from the airport, and had hired a car from Zoom Carz for a period of two days. The Company had put up two notices on each of its cars. One of them read that no unauthorized person was allowed to take a lift in the car. The other read that the driver had been told expressly, not to give lifts to unauthorized people. He was only authorized to pick up and drop off persons as instructed by the University. On his way to the airport to pick up Amit Nayar, a famous author, the driver sees a friend on the sidewalk and decides to give him a lift. While driving on the highway to the airport, the driver caused an accident due to rash and negligent driving, and thefriend sustained a head injury and was paralysed for life. Who is to be held liable?a)The driver ought to be held liable, as it is his fault alone.b)The Company must be held liable, as it was a negligent act of the driver, in the course of employment.c)The University should probably be held liable for not giving him instructions that were clear enough.d)The driver’s act was in defiance of express orders of the Company. Hence, the Company cannot be held liable, and the driver will be liable 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 provides cars for rented use in the city of New Heights. A University in the city was organising a Literary Festival, and had to pick up and drop off eminent guests from the airport, and had hired a car from Zoom Carz for a period of two days. The Company had put up two notices on each of its cars. One of them read that no unauthorized person was allowed to take a lift in the car. The other read that the driver had been told expressly, not to give lifts to unauthorized people. He was only authorized to pick up and drop off persons as instructed by the University. On his way to the airport to pick up Amit Nayar, a famous author, the driver sees a friend on the sidewalk and decides to give him a lift. While driving on the highway to the airport, the driver caused an accident due to rash and negligent driving, and thefriend sustained a head injury and was paralysed for life. Who is to be held liable?a)The driver ought to be held liable, as it is his fault alone.b)The Company must be held liable, as it was a negligent act of the driver, in the course of employment.c)The University should probably be held liable for not giving him instructions that were clear enough.d)The driver’s act was in defiance of express orders of the Company. Hence, the Company cannot be held liable, and the driver will be liable 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 provides cars for rented use in the city of New Heights. A University in the city was organising a Literary Festival, and had to pick up and drop off eminent guests from the airport, and had hired a car from Zoom Carz for a period of two days. The Company had put up two notices on each of its cars. One of them read that no unauthorized person was allowed to take a lift in the car. The other read that the driver had been told expressly, not to give lifts to unauthorized people. He was only authorized to pick up and drop off persons as instructed by the University. On his way to the airport to pick up Amit Nayar, a famous author, the driver sees a friend on the sidewalk and decides to give him a lift. While driving on the highway to the airport, the driver caused an accident due to rash and negligent driving, and thefriend sustained a head injury and was paralysed for life. Who is to be held liable?a)The driver ought to be held liable, as it is his fault alone.b)The Company must be held liable, as it was a negligent act of the driver, in the course of employment.c)The University should probably be held liable for not giving him instructions that were clear enough.d)The driver’s act was in defiance of express orders of the Company. Hence, the Company cannot be held liable, and the driver will be liable 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 provides cars for rented use in the city of New Heights. A University in the city was organising a Literary Festival, and had to pick up and drop off eminent guests from the airport, and had hired a car from Zoom Carz for a period of two days. The Company had put up two notices on each of its cars. One of them read that no unauthorized person was allowed to take a lift in the car. The other read that the driver had been told expressly, not to give lifts to unauthorized people. He was only authorized to pick up and drop off persons as instructed by the University. On his way to the airport to pick up Amit Nayar, a famous author, the driver sees a friend on the sidewalk and decides to give him a lift. While driving on the highway to the airport, the driver caused an accident due to rash and negligent driving, and thefriend sustained a head injury and was paralysed for life. Who is to be held liable?a)The driver ought to be held liable, as it is his fault alone.b)The Company must be held liable, as it was a negligent act of the driver, in the course of employment.c)The University should probably be held liable for not giving him instructions that were clear enough.d)The driver’s act was in defiance of express orders of the Company. Hence, the Company cannot be held liable, and the driver will be liable 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 provides cars for rented use in the city of New Heights. A University in the city was organising a Literary Festival, and had to pick up and drop off eminent guests from the airport, and had hired a car from Zoom Carz for a period of two days. The Company had put up two notices on each of its cars. One of them read that no unauthorized person was allowed to take a lift in the car. The other read that the driver had been told expressly, not to give lifts to unauthorized people. He was only authorized to pick up and drop off persons as instructed by the University. On his way to the airport to pick up Amit Nayar, a famous author, the driver sees a friend on the sidewalk and decides to give him a lift. While driving on the highway to the airport, the driver caused an accident due to rash and negligent driving, and thefriend sustained a head injury and was paralysed for life. Who is to be held liable?a)The driver ought to be held liable, as it is his fault alone.b)The Company must be held liable, as it was a negligent act of the driver, in the course of employment.c)The University should probably be held liable for not giving him instructions that were clear enough.d)The driver’s act was in defiance of express orders of the Company. Hence, the Company cannot be held liable, and the driver will be liable 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 provides cars for rented use in the city of New Heights. A University in the city was organising a Literary Festival, and had to pick up and drop off eminent guests from the airport, and had hired a car from Zoom Carz for a period of two days. The Company had put up two notices on each of its cars. One of them read that no unauthorized person was allowed to take a lift in the car. The other read that the driver had been told expressly, not to give lifts to unauthorized people. He was only authorized to pick up and drop off persons as instructed by the University. On his way to the airport to pick up Amit Nayar, a famous author, the driver sees a friend on the sidewalk and decides to give him a lift. While driving on the highway to the airport, the driver caused an accident due to rash and negligent driving, and thefriend sustained a head injury and was paralysed for life. Who is to be held liable?a)The driver ought to be held liable, as it is his fault alone.b)The Company must be held liable, as it was a negligent act of the driver, in the course of employment.c)The University should probably be held liable for not giving him instructions that were clear enough.d)The driver’s act was in defiance of express orders of the Company. Hence, the Company cannot be held liable, and the driver will be liable for his act.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.